Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

In Re: A. Govindaswamy and ors.

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Jul 29, 1949
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/774778

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Chennai
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
Criminal Revn. No. 885 and Cri. Revn. Petn. No. 821 of 1949
Subject
Criminal

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

- - Mani, for the petitioners, urged that Section 75 would apply only to persons guilty of riotous, disorderly or indecent behaviour as a result of being drunk and not as here, without being drunk and in a perfectly sober mood. , like these petitioners.

Key legal issue
Criminal
Acts & sections
Madras City Police Act, 1888 - Sections 75; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1898 - Sections 106

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

In Re: A. Govindaswamy and ors.

Advocate N.S. Mani, Adv. for Row and Reddy

Respondent

Advocate Crown Prosecutor

Legal References

Reported In
AIR1950Mad31

Excerpt

- - mani, for the petitioners, urged that section 75 would apply only to persons guilty of riotous, disorderly or indecent behaviour as a result of being drunk and not as here, without being drunk and in a perfectly sober mood. , like these petitioners.orderpanchapakesa ayyar, j.1. the petitioners have been sentenced under section 75, city police act to undergo three weeks rigorous imprisonment each for behaving in a riotous, disorderly or indecent manner and have also been directed to execute bonds themselves for rs. 50 each with one surety for rs. 50 each for six months after release under section 106, criminal p. c. mr. mani, for the petitioners, urged that section 75 would apply only to persons guilty of riotous, disorderly or indecent behaviour as a result of being drunk and not as here, without being drunk and in a perfectly sober mood. i cannot agree. section 75 punishes both drunkards incapable of taking care of themselves, and people, guilty of riotous, disorderly or indecent behaviour in any public place, etc., like these petitioners. the petitioners abused in filthy and indecent language, the loyal workers and behaved in a riotous, disorderly and indecent fashion in a public place and were rightly convicted under section 75. but, considering all the circumstances, i modify the sentences to the periods of imprisonment already undergone and a fine of rs. 15 each or in default further rigorous imprisonment for a week each. time for payment till 3 p. m. on 14th august 1949.2 there was no jastification in the circumstances of this case to take bonds under section 106, criminal p. c., from any of the petitioners, none of whom had any antecedents of crimes involving a breach of the peace and all of whom had acted in sudden heat of passion on finding their fellow workers refusing to join the strike and persisting in going on working, the bonds are cancelled.

Full Judgment

ORDER

Panchapakesa Ayyar, J.

1. The petitioners have been sentenced under Section 75, City Police Act to undergo three weeks rigorous imprisonment each for behaving in a riotous, disorderly or indecent manner and have also been directed to execute bonds themselves for Rs. 50 each with one surety for Rs. 50 each for six months after release under Section 106, Criminal P. C. Mr. Mani, for the petitioners, urged that Section 75 would apply only to persons guilty of riotous, disorderly or indecent behaviour as a result of being drunk and not as here, without being drunk and in a perfectly sober mood. I cannot agree. Section 75 punishes both drunkards incapable of taking care of themselves, and people, guilty of riotous, disorderly or indecent behaviour in any public place, etc., like these petitioners. The petitioners abused in filthy and indecent language, the loyal workers and behaved in a riotous, disorderly and indecent fashion in a public place and were rightly convicted under Section 75. But, considering all the circumstances, I modify the sentences to the periods of imprisonment already undergone and a fine of Rs. 15 each or in default further rigorous imprisonment for a week each. Time for payment till 3 P. M. on 14th August 1949.

2 There was no jastification in the circumstances of this case to take bonds under Section 106, Criminal P. C., from any of the petitioners, none of whom had any antecedents of crimes involving a breach of the peace and all of whom had acted in sudden heat of passion on finding their fellow workers refusing to join the strike and persisting in going on working, The bonds are cancelled.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial