Lawyers Directory Listing
Chat with us free on WhatsApp — tell us your city and legal matter and our team connects you with the right lawyer. No form, no fee.
Criminal Revision No. 694 of 1974, decided on 10th October 1974.
‑‑ S.144 (1) & (3)‑Order under subsection (0‑Can be directed to a particular person 'with his identity clearly stated‑Order under subsection (3)‑Can be directed to public generally but only when frequenting or visiting a particular place‑General order of Magistrate forbidding people living in his Sub‑Division from preparing khoa out of milk, or its use in sweetmeats, or export Neither covered by subsection (3) nor by subsection (1), hence, illegal and set aside.
M. G. Khadim for Petitioner.
M. A. Bajwa for A.‑G. for the State.
Date of hearing: 10th October 1974.
This revision petition is directed against the order dated the 2nd of September 1974 made by, the S. D. M. Bhalwal under section 144, Cr. P. C.
This order forbids the people living in the Sub‑Division, whether in towns or villages, from preparing "Khoa" out of milk for commercial purposes and also its use by any means in the preparation of sweetmeats for commercial purposes. The order is also intended to ban the export of khoa and allied milk products beyond the limits of Bhalwal Sub‑Division.
The order 'has been challenged inter alia on the ground that being addressed to the general public and not to any particular person it comes within the purview of subsection (3) of section 144, Cr. P. C and not under subsection (1) thereof and since it is not meant to be complied with by the public generally "when frequenting or visiting a particular place" it is completely outside the scope of subsection (3). The contention has force. While scrutinising an order under section 144, Cr. P. C. it has first to be decided as to whether the order has been issued under subsection (1) or A subsection (3) thereof. An order under subsection (1) can be directed only to a particular person with his identity clearly stated therein and it has to be served upon the person concerned in the manner provided by section 134 of the Code. The order under attack is clearly not such an order inasmuch as it is not addressed to any particular person but to the public generally. It is thus evident that the order is one under subsection (3).
It is only under this subsection that an order can be directed to the public generally but such an order has a very limited scope. It can contain only such directions as can be required to be complied with by an individual or the public generally when frequenting or visiting a particular place. Preparation of khoa' or its use in sweetmeats or its export beyond the limits of the Sub‑Division is, therefore, clearly outside the scope of sub section (3) of section 144.
The result is that I accept the revision petition and set aside the impugned order.
Petition accepted.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer