1945 (8) TMI 12

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... be published in a week to 26, and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 200 on each count. 2. There are no disputes about the facts of this case; but what was contended was that no prosecution can lie under the Newspaper Control Order of 1942, as it was superseded by the Newspaper Control Order of 1944, which came into force on 17th July, 1944, which contained no provisions similar to Clauses (1) of the earlier Order, and that on the date on which he was prosecuted there was no law in the Statute book under which he had committed any offence in respect of the acts complained of. In short, the argument was that even though it was an offence under the Order as it stood on the date on which the publications were made, still by reason of the fact ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ourts have to apply principles of equity and good conscience analogous to the principles of the General Clauses Act. The printing and publishing of newspapers during the weeks ending 25th June, 1944 and 2nd July, 1944, containing 28 and 32 pages respectively became an offence at the end of each of those two weeks when the newspapers were published with the number of pages mentioned above. There can be no doubt that the appellant was guilty of having committed offences under the Newspaper Control Order of 1942 on those dates. 5. The prosecution in this case was laid only on 28th October, 1944. By that time the Newspaper Control Order of 1942 had been superseded and a new Order had been promulgated under which the act of the appellant woul....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d any such investigation, legal proceeding or remedy may be instituted, continued or enforced, ana any such penalty, forfeiture or punishment may be imposed as if the repealing Act or Regulation has not been passed. As already stated above, the provisions of the General Clauses Act though they do not apply as such can be looked into as a rule of prudence, in dealing with a question of interpretation of the kind raised by the defence in the case. The Newspaper Control Order of 1944 is no doubt a superseding order. It does not contain any provision that there shall be no prosecution for offences already committed under the order which was superseded; nor has the superseding order made any provision in respect of such offences already commi....