https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=281036 The State Legislature was competent to amend the Indian Electricity Act, 1910 because electricity fell within the Concurrent List, and the amendment was protected by Presidential assent, giving it operative force within the State. On retrospectivity, the Court examined whether enhanced punishment, summary procedure, transfer of pending cases, and loss of appeal or revision could validly affect pending prosecutions and vested appellate rights, noting that the right of appeal is substantive and cannot be destroyed by procedural change. The broader constitutional question on the effect of Article 20(1) was not finally decided and was referred to a larger Bench. en-us Wed, 26 May 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 31 May 2019 18:20:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=281036 The State Legislature was competent to amend the Indian Electricity Act, 1910 because electricity fell within the Concurrent List, and the amendment was protected by Presidential assent, giving it operative force within the State. On retrospectivity, the Court examined whether enhanced punishment, summary procedure, transfer of pending cases, and loss of appeal or revision could validly affect pending prosecutions and vested appellate rights, noting that the right of appeal is substantive and cannot be destroyed by procedural change. The broader constitutional question on the effect of Article 20(1) was not finally decided and was referred to a larger Bench. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 26 May 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=281036