Municipal bye-law powers upheld for restricting public prostitutes across the full municipal area and sustaining breach convictions.

A municipal bye-law under Section 298 of the U.P. Municipalities Act, 1916 was treated as valid where it prohibited public prostitutes from residing in and keeping brothels within the entire municipal area, because the general rule-making power was read broadly and the specified area could extend to the full municipal limits if clearly defined. The article also notes that a person found on evidence to be a prostitute available for prostitution to others could be treated as a public prostitute for breach of the bye-law. On that reasoning, the convictions and related orders were maintained.

---

---

Issues: (i) whether a municipal bye-law made under Section 298 of the U.P. Municipalities Act, 1916 could validly prohibit public prostitutes from residing in, and keeping brothels within, the whole municipal area; (ii) whether the applicants could be convicted for breach of the bye-law on the finding that they were public prostitutes.

Issue (i): whether a municipal bye-law made under Section 298 of the U.P. Municipalities Act, 1916 could validly prohibit public prostitutes from residing in, and keeping brothels within, the whole municipal area.

Analysis: The general power to make bye-laws under Section 298(1) was treated as wide, and Sub-section (2) was understood as illustrative rather than restrictive. The expression "area" in Clause (e), item H, List I of Sub-section (2) was held capable of including the entire municipal limits, so long as the prohibited area was sufficiently specified. The bye-law was also regarded as reasonable and directed to health and municipal order.

Conclusion: The bye-law was within the Board's power and was valid.

Issue (ii): whether the applicants could be convicted for breach of the bye-law on the finding that they were public prostitutes.

Analysis: The finding of the magistrate was that the applicants were prostitutes, and the evidence showed that they were available for prostitution to others, which satisfied the description of public prostitutes. The contention that they were merely private prostitutes or artists was rejected, and the finding was not successfully challenged in appeal.

Conclusion: The applicants were liable to conviction for contravention of the bye-law.

Final Conclusion: The revisions failed, and the convictions and orders below were maintained.

Ratio Decidendi: A municipal authority empowered to make bye-laws under Section 298 of the U.P. Municipalities Act, 1916 may specify the entire municipal area as the prohibited area for public prostitutes, and a person found to be a prostitute available for indiscriminate sexual intercourse for hire can be treated as a public prostitute for purposes of such a bye-law.

---