https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169691 Article 13(1) was construed as prospective: pre-Constitution laws inconsistent with Part III became void only to the extent of inconsistency and from the Constitution's commencement, without extinguishing liabilities already incurred for past acts. On that reasoning, pending prosecutions under such laws could continue because the provision did not operate retrospectively or repeal the law ab initio, and the principle reflected in section 6 of the General Clauses Act supported continuation of proceedings based on pre-Constitution conduct. A dissenting view held that once the inconsistent law became inoperative, pending proceedings under it could not continue after the Constitution came into force. en-us Mon, 22 Jan 1951 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 30 Apr 2015 18:15:17 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169691 Article 13(1) was construed as prospective: pre-Constitution laws inconsistent with Part III became void only to the extent of inconsistency and from the Constitution's commencement, without extinguishing liabilities already incurred for past acts. On that reasoning, pending prosecutions under such laws could continue because the provision did not operate retrospectively or repeal the law ab initio, and the principle reflected in section 6 of the General Clauses Act supported continuation of proceedings based on pre-Constitution conduct. A dissenting view held that once the inconsistent law became inoperative, pending proceedings under it could not continue after the Constitution came into force. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 22 Jan 1951 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169691