Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether Section 1(3) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 had come into force so as to sustain the validity of the notification appointing the commencement date and the consequent investigation under the Act.
Analysis: The commencement provision was read with Section 5(1) of the General Clauses Act, 1897, under which an Act not expressed to come into operation on a particular day takes effect on the date of presidential assent. On that construction, the power to notify the commencement date under Section 1(3) became operative immediately on enactment. A contrary view would make the commencement clause ineffective and produce impractical and absurd results, which the Court declined to adopt. The reasoning was supported by the approach in the cited Supreme Court authorities on commencement provisions.
Conclusion: Section 1(3) was held to have come into force on assent, the notification was valid, and the challenge to the investigation failed.
Final Conclusion: The Original Petition was rejected and the proceedings under the Act were left undisturbed.
Ratio Decidendi: A commencement clause empowering the Government to appoint the date of enforcement operates from the date of enactment itself, and the Act may be brought into force by notification without any further legislative act.