Invalid notification cannot be revived by deeming provision where prohibition also intrudes on Central import-export power.

Section 7 of the amending Act was construed as not reviving a notification that had already been declared invalid and was therefore a nullity; a deeming provision treating it as issued under the amended Act did not restore legal force to the void notification. The Court also held that provincial power to regulate possession of intoxicants was subject to the Central field over import and export across customs frontiers, so an absolute prohibition on possession in Bombay would trench upon that central competence. The notification of 17 July 1939 was therefore not in force, and no conviction could be based on it.

---

---

Issues: Whether the notification prohibiting possession of intoxicants in Bombay was revived or otherwise made effective by Section 7 of the amending Act, and whether, if treated as operative, it remained within the provincial legislative power.

Analysis: Section 7 was construed as not extending to a notification that had already been declared invalid and was therefore a nullity. A legislative deeming provision that the notification had been issued under the amended Act did not amount to revival of a void notification. The Court further held that the provincial power to regulate possession of intoxicants under the relevant legislative entry was subject to the Central power over import and export across customs frontiers, and that an absolute prohibition on possession in Bombay would impermissibly trench upon that central field.

Conclusion: The notification of 17 July 1939 was not in force and no conviction could be founded on it; the reference was answered against the prosecution.

---