SHEOSHANKAR Vs. STATE GOVT OF MADHYA PRADESH
LAWS(BOM)-1951-4-6
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Decided on April 18,1951

SHEOSHANKAR Appellant
VERSUS
STATE Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) THIS is an application purporting to be under Article 226 of the constitution for the following reliefs: (i) A writ of Mandamus directing the respondents not to enforce against the petitioner the Central Provinces and Berar prohibition Act VII (7) of 1938 or all such sections of the same as may be found inconsistent with the Constitution: (ii) a writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to withdraw and cancel all such notifications rules and orders made by the respondents in exercise of the powers conferred on them by the provisions of the said Act as may be found inconsistent with the Constitution: (iii) all the costs of the petition, and (iv) Any other relief that this Honourable Court may deem proper to grant.
(2.) THE petitioner states that he is a permanent resident of Nagpur and is earning Rs. 100 per month and has been accustomed for a number of years to take alcoholic drinks, generally country liquor, at an average of 4 ounces per day.
(3.) SINCE the enforcement of the Central Provinces and Berar Prohibition act, 1938 (Act VII (7) of 1938), in the Nagpur District by Notification no. 652-800-VIII, dated 5-8-1946 the petitioner had to stop consumption of country liquor altogether inasmuch as a permit for bottled foreign liquor in forms F. L. XII and XII-A alone is available under rules 7 and 7-A, Central Provinces and Berar Foreign Liquor Rules, 1938, issued by the Govt. under Sections 30. 32, 33 and 68 (2) (f) and (i) of the said Act and under Notification No. 1271-1095-VIII dated 2-1-1938. Even this permit is subject to the condition that the licensing authority should be satisfied that the social and economic status of the petitioner warrant the grant of a permit and that the petitioner is not likely to abuse it.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.