Retrospective legal fiction restored police-based cognizance under the Mysore Excise Act, validating the charge-sheet.

The Supreme Court applied a retrospective deeming provision in Mysore Act 1 of 1971 to hold that the deleted words "or police" in Section 60(b) of the Mysore Excise Act, 1965 were treated as if they had always remained in force. Giving full effect to the legal fiction, the Court held that a police charge-sheet remained a valid basis for cognizance of an offence under Section 34. The lower courts erred in ignoring the retrospective restoration, and the Magistrate was competent to take cognizance on the police report.

---

---

Issues: Whether, after the retrospective deeming provision in Mysore Act 1 of 1971, a Magistrate could take cognizance of an offence under Section 34 of the Mysore Excise Act, 1965 on a police charge-sheet notwithstanding the earlier omission of the words "or police" from Section 60(b).

Analysis: Section 60(b) originally permitted cognizance on the complaint or report of an Excise or Police Officer. The later ordinance had deleted the words "or police", but Section 23 of Mysore Act 1 of 1971 enacted a legal fiction that the amendment was never made and that the pre-amendment provision continued in force. The deeming provision had to be carried to its logical end, with the result that the omitted words were treated as always having remained in Section 60(b). On that basis, the police charge-sheet was a valid foundation for cognizance. The lower courts erred in holding otherwise.

Conclusion: The police charge-sheet was valid and the Magistrate was competent to take cognizance of the offence.

Ratio Decidendi: When a statute retrospectively restores an earlier provision by legal fiction, the court must give full effect to the fiction and treat the restored text as having been in force throughout the relevant period.

---