Chennai Court May 1943 Judgments

In Re: S. Govind Swaminathan and ors.

Court: Chennai

Reported in: AIR1943Mad714

Horwill, J.1. These applications under Section 491, Criminal P.C., have been filed because of the decision of the Federal Court, not yet published in the regular reports, that Rule 26 of the Rules framed under the Defence of India Act is somewhat different in its scope from Section 2(2)(x), Defence of India Act, under which the rule has been framed, and that Rule 26 was therefore ultra vires of the Central Government which framed the rule. From that decision it follows that the petitioner before the Federal Court, as the petitioners here, was detained unlawfully. Since that judgment was pronounced however the Governor-General has issued Ordinance 14 of 1943 amending Section 2 (2)(x), Defence of India Act, to bring it into conformity with Rule 26.2. Two main points have been raised on behalf of the petitioners. The first is that the Governor-General had no power to amend an Act of the Indian Legislature, and the other is that the amendment could not have any retrospective effect. On the...