THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN versus SHRI G. CHAWLA AND DR. POHUMAL

Citation: [1959] SUPP. 1 S.C.R. 904 · Decided: 16-12-1958 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: SUDHI RANJAN DAS · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

Httkui11 Chand 
l\1alhotta 
v. 
Union of India 
S. J(. Das ]. 
Decefnber z6. 
• 
904 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1959] Supp. 
the appellant and that was the basis for the order of 
removal passed against him. 
For these reasons we hold that there is no merit in 
the appeal which must accordingly be dismissed with 
costs. 
Appeal dismissed. 
THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN 
v. 
SHRI G. CHAWLA AND DR. POHUMAL 
(S. R. DAS, c. J., s. K. DAS, P. B. GAJENDRAGADKAR 
K. N. WANCHOO and M. HIDAYATULLAH, JJ.) 
Legislative Competence-Validity of enactment-Control of 
Somid Amplifiers-Pith and sitbstance of fegislation-Ajmer (Sound 
Amplifiers Control) Act, I952 (Ajmer 3 of Ig53), s. 3-Govermnent 
of Part C States Act, I95I (49 of I95I), s. 2I-Conslit1<1ion of 
India, Sch. VII, List I, Entry JI, List II, Entries I, 6. 
The Ajmer (Sound Amplifiers Control) Act, 1952, was en-
acted by the Ajmer Legislative Assembly which, by s. 21 of the 
Government of Part C States Act, 1951, was empowered to make 
laws for the whole or any part of the State with respect to any 
of the matters enumerated in the State List or in the Concurrent 
List. 
The respondents were prosecuted under s. 3 of the Act for 
breach of the conditions of the permit granted for the use of 
sound amplifiers. On a reference under s. 432 of the Code of 
Criminal Procedure, the Judicial Commissioner of Ajmer held 
that the Act fell within Entry No. 31 of the Union List and not 
within Entry No. 6 of the State List as was claimed by the State, 
and, therefore, was ttltra vires the State Legislature. 
Held, that the pith and substance of the impugned Act was 
the control of the use of amplifiers in the interests of health and 
also tranquillity and thus the Act was substantially within the 
powers conferred by Entry No. 6 and conceivably Entry No. l 
of the State List, and did not fall within Entry No. 31 of the 
Union List, even though the amplifier, the use of which is re-
gulated and controlled, is an apparatus for broadcasting or com-
munication. Accordingly, the Act was intra vires the State 
Legislature. 
(1) S.C.R. SUPREME COUH.T REPORTS 
905 
CRIMINAL 
APPELLATE 
JURISDICTION: 
Criminal 
Appeal No. 1 of 1955. 
State of Rajasthan 
Appeal from the judgment and order dated October 
v. 
13, 1954, of the former Judicial Commissioner's Court, 
Chawla 
Ajmer, in Criminal Reference No. 31 of 1954. 
H. J. Umrigar and T. M. Sen, for the appellant. 
The respondents did not appear. 
1958. 
December 16. The Judgment of the Court 
was d.elivered by 
HIDAYATULLAH, J.-This appeal was preferred by Hidayatul/ah J. 
the State of Ajmer, but after the reorganisation of 
States, the State of Rajasthan stands substituted for 
the former State. It was filed against the decision of 
the Judicial Commissioner of Ajmer, who certified the 
case as fit ~or appeal to this Court under Art. 132 of 
the Constitution. 
The Ajmer Legislative Assembly enacted the Ajmer 
(Sound Amplifiers Control) Act, 1952 (Ajmer 3 of l:l53), 
(hereinafter called the Act) which received the assent 
of the President on March 9, 1953. This Act was 
successfully impugned by the respondents before the 
learned Judicial Commissioner, who held that it was 
in excess of the powers conferred on the State Legisla-
ture under s. 21 of the Government of Part C States 
Act, 1951 (49 of 1951) and, therefore, ultra vires the 
State Legislature. 
The respondents (who were absent at the hearing) 
were prosecuted under s. 3 of the Act for breach of the 
first two conditions of the permit granted to the first 
respondent, to use sound amplifiers on May 15 and 16, 
1954. 
These amplifiers, it was alleged against them, 
were so tuned as to be audible beyond 30 yards (condi-
tion "No. 1) and were placed at a height of more than 
6 feet from the ground (condition No. 2). 
The second 
respondent was at the time of the breach, operating 
the sound amplifiers for the Sammelan, for which per-
mission was obtained. 
On a reference under s. 432 of the Code of Criminal 
Procedure, the Judicial Commissioner of Ajmer held 
that tho pith and substance of the Act fell within 
!J06 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1959] Supp. 
1958 
Entry No. 31 of the Union List anc1 not within Entry 
S 
.-:-R . 
h 
No. 6 of the State List, as was claimed by the State. 
late o; 
a;ast an 
v. 
Under Art. 246(4) of the Constitution, Parliament 
Chawla 
had power to make laws for any part of the territory 
of India not included in Part A or Hof the First Soho-
J/idayatullah J. dule, notwi

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.