sentence of fine as imposed. Section 117 of the Bombay Police Act is a
punishing Section and the substantive sentence for the present purpose is
Section 116 of the Bombay Police Act, which reads thus :
“116. Disregard of notice in public building.
No person shall, in any Court, Police Station, Police
Office, building occupied by Government or building
occupied by any public body, smoke or spit in contravention
of a notice by a competent authority in charge of such place
and fixed to such Court, Station, office or building.”
Evidently, the act of entering Court building chewing Pan is
not covered in this Section. It is trite that any provision defining an offence
has to be read and construed strictly. There is no scope for liberal
construction in such a case. We would again hasten to add that this may
not be read as approving the act of the petitioner in entering the Court
room chewing Pan. However, it has to be seen, that strictly speaking the act
did not fall under Section 116 of the Act. In our considered opinion, the
petitioner cannot be precluded from demonstrating the same in the present
proceeding, notwithstanding a formal challenge being raised to the order of
conviction and sentence. This is more so, when the same has resulted into a
drastic civil consequence to the petitioner, of sustaining dismissal from
service. We, therefore, find that going by the phraseology as used in
Section 116 of the Act, the act did not strictly fall in the same.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR
WRIT PETITION NO.4732/2003
Dnyanshwar Vithuji Ghude Vs State of Maharashtra
CORAM
: A.P. BHANGALE AND
C.V. BHADANG, JJ.
Date of pronouncing the judgment : 01.10.2014
Citation;2015(2) ALLMR 647
