| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1956 SLG 396 1956 SLD 396 = 1956 PLD 395 |
Federal Court, Pakistan
Constitutional Criminal Appeal No. 3 of 1955, decided on 14th February 1956 from the judgment and order of the High Court of Judicature at Dacca, dated the 8th March 1955, in Criminal Appeal No. 363 of 1954.
Present: Muhammad Munir, C. J., Akram, Shahabuddin and Muhammad Sharif, JJ
Nazir-ud-Din Ahmad and A. M. Abdullah, instructed by Kemal-ud-Din Hossain, Attorney for Appellant. A. F. M. Mesbahuddin, instructed by Khondkar Shamsul huda, Attorney for
Respondent.
Constitutional Criminal Appeal No. 3 of 1955, decided on 14th February 1956 from the judgment and order of the High Court of Judicature at Dacca, dated the 8th March 1955, in Criminal Appeal No. 363 of 1954.
Present: Muhammad Munir, C. J., Akram, Shahabuddin and Muhammad Sharif, JJ
Nazir-ud-Din Ahmad and A. M. Abdullah, instructed by Kemal-ud-Din Hossain, Attorney for Appellant. A. F. M. Mesbahuddin, instructed by Khondkar Shamsul huda, Attorney for
Respondent.
MUHAMMAD YUSUF-Appellant
VERSUS
THE CROWN-Respondent
Law: Pakistan Criminal Law (Amendment) Act (XIX of 1948)
Section:
Law: Government of India Act, 1935
Section: 100
P L D 1956 Federal Court 395 Constitutional Criminal Appeal No. 3 of 1955, decided on 14th February 1956 from the judgment and order of the High Court of Judicature at Dacca, dated the 8th March 1955, in Criminal Appeal No. 363 of 1954. Pakistan Criminal Law (Amendment) Act (XIX of 1948)----Intra vires the Federal Legislature-Government of India Act, 1935, S. 100, Seventh Schedule, Lists I, 11, 111-Method for determining List in which a particular- subject falls-List II item l and List III item 1 (b). The Pakistan Criminal Law (Amendment) Act (XIX of 1948) was intra vires the Federal Legislature. The Act came within the purview of item 1 (b) of List III (Concurrent List). Seventh Schedule, Government of India Act, 1935. Even if it be assumed that the Act also comes within the purview of entry (1) of the Provincial Legislative List (List 11), the Federal Legislature, by reason of the non-obstante clause in subsection (2) of section 100 of the Government of India Act, 1935, had the power to enact it. In considering whether a particular Legislative measure does or does not fall within a particular entry, it is necessary to, examine the entire scheme and principle of that measure, the object and policy underlying it and the manner in which by various provisions in it the Legislature has attempted to carry out that object. If, after examining the impugned legislation in this manner, the Court can, with reasonable certitude, find that the dominant aspect of that measure brings it within the purview of a particular entry, the legislation must be held to relate to that entry, even though one or more of its provisions may incidentally effect matters which may also fall within other competing entries. If we apply this test to the Pakistan Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 1948, there is no difficulty in finding that the Act was a measure to combat certain offences committed in connection with matters concerning the Central and Provincial Governments. Governor-General-in-Council v. Province of Madras 72 I A 91, Attorney-General for Ontario v. Attorney-General for Canada (1912) A C 571 (583), Citizens…