{"id":4586,"date":"1974-02-05T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1974-02-04T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/swantraj-ors-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-5-february-1974"},"modified":"2015-02-18T18:42:52","modified_gmt":"2015-02-18T13:12:52","slug":"swantraj-ors-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-5-february-1974","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/swantraj-ors-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-5-february-1974","title":{"rendered":"Swantraj & Ors vs State Of Maharashtra on 5 February, 1974"},"content":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n
Swantraj & Ors vs State Of Maharashtra on 5 February, 1974<\/div>\n
Equivalent citations: 1974 AIR 517, \t\t 1974 SCR (3) 287<\/div>\n
Author: V Krishnaiyer<\/div>\n
Bench: Krishnaiyer, V.R.<\/div>\n
           PETITIONER:\nSWANTRAJ & ORS.\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT05\/02\/1974\n\nBENCH:\nKRISHNAIYER, V.R.\nBENCH:\nKRISHNAIYER, V.R.\nSARKARIA, RANJIT SINGH\n\nCITATION:\n 1974 AIR  517\t\t  1974 SCR  (3) 287\n CITATOR INFO :\n F\t    1982 SC1397\t (2)\n\n\nACT:\nDrugs and Cosmetics Act, (23 of 1940), S. 18(1)(c)--`Stocked\nfor sale', if includes temporary storage for sale not at the\nPlace  of storage but elsewhere--Whether forms for  licences\nProvided   are\t inflexible  or\t  suitable   licences\twith\nmodification can be issued.\n\n\n\nHEADNOTE:\nSection 18(c) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940, provides\nthat no person shall manufacture for sale, or sell, or stock\nor  exhibit for sale or distribute any drug except  under  a\nlicence\t and  s.  27(b)\t provides  for\tpunishment  for\t its\ncontravention.\nThe  appellant\twas a wholesale dealer\tand  distributor  of\ndrugs  and had the necessary licences prescribed  under\t the\nAct.   It had also the necessary licences authorising it  to\nsell,  stock or exhibit for sale or distribute by  wholesale\nthrough\t its motor van.\t The appellant booked certain  drugs\nby  lorry but as the motor van was delayed, the\t drugs\twere\nreleased  from the lorry and temporarily kept in the  godown\nof a local drugs dealer.\nOn  the questions, (1) whether the licence  which  permitted\nstocking  and  selling in a specified vehicle,\tcovered\t the\nbrief interval of storage in the godown before loading on to\nthe  appellant's  van,\tand  (2)  whether  the\tact  of\t the\nappellant  in temporarily storing drugs, not  for  immediate\nsale  there, but for ultimate sale in various parts  of\t the\nState,\tis  contrary to, s. 18(c) and  punishable  under  s.\n27(b).\nHELD :(1)(a) A licence in terms for a vehicle cannot do duty\nfor one to keep drugs in a fixed place.\t Assuming that\tnone\nof  the prescribed forms provide for  anitinerant  wholesale\ndistributor  and that it would be impossible to furnish\t the\nvery  many possible places where for short  intervals  drugs\nmay  have to be stored awaiting the arrival of the  van,  an\narguments  ab inconvenience cannot be a defence. if the\t law\nrequires a licence for a place and drugs are kept in such  a\nplace  without the licence, even as a stop-gap\tarrangement.\nThe paramount purpose of regulation through licensing is, to\nset  in\t motion\t vigilant  medical  watch  over\t the  proper\nprotection  of\tdrugs  and medicines.  verification  of\t the\nexpiry\tof the time of their efficacy, and the rejection  of\nspurious  products.  If godowns, temporary stores etc.,\t can\nbe  unlicensed, they can become foci of\t dubious,  deceptive\nand harmful drugs.  Therefore, every place where storage  is\nmade must be licensed. [290 D-F; 292 A-0]\n(b)  The  rules\t made under the Act,  while  they  visualise\nwholesale distribution licences. the forms have not provided\nfor  licences  for  mobile vans or  distribution  depots  so\nessential for a wholesale distribution system.\tThe  licence\ngiven to the appellants' vehicle is an improvised innovation\nwithout\t the law.  'Mere is no express power to thus  modify\nthe  forms  or\tinnovate according to  need.   But  such  an\nauthority  to  grant suitable licenses under rr. 61  and  62\n(proviso),  including  the  wayside  depots  or\t 'emergency'\nstores.\t could be implied.  The appellant  should  therefore\nhave applied for and obtained the necessary licence for\t the\ntemporary storage. [291 C-H]\n(Law  Lexicon  of  British  India  compiled  and  edited  by\nRamanatha Aiyar. sale there' or 'stocked for sale  elsewhere\nlate.\tThe  Central Government should however\tclarify\t the\nrules\tand  provide  for  appropriate\tforms.\t The   first\ninterpretation\tpermits abuse through loopholes,  while\t the\nsecond\ttightens  up but casts on the dealer the  burden  of\nobtaining more licences.  Since risk\n288\nof life and health is avoided by the latter  interpretation,\nit  must  be held that the storage, even  though  for  short\nspells\tand  on ad hoc basis and without intent to  sell  at\nthat  place but as part of the sales business, comes  within\nstocking for sale in s. 18(c) and r. 62. [293 C-E]\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal No. 177 of
\n1970.\n<\/p>\n
From the judgment and order dated the 7th August 1969 of the
\nBombay\tHigh Court in (Nagpur Bench) at Nagpur\tin  Criminal
\nAppeal No. 25 of 1968.\n<\/p>\n
S.   C. Manchanda and O. P. Verma for the appellant.
\nM.   C. Bhandare and M. N. Shroff, for the respondent.
\nThe Judgment of the Court was delivered by
\nKRISHNA IYER, J.-Every legislation is a social document\t and
\njudicial  construction\tseeks  to  decipher  the   statutory
\nmission,  language permitting, taking the cue from the\trule
\nin  Heydon’s(1) case of suppressing the evil  and  advancing
\nthe remedy.  The Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 (the Act, for
\nshort)\tis  a life-saving statute one of the  provisions  of
\nwhich,\ttogether with a bunch of rules and forms, falls\t for
\ninterpretation and application to the substantially admitted
\nfacts set out concisely in the order granting certificate of
\nfitness\t to appeal.  The Bench projected  the  factual-legal
\nissue in these words :-\n<\/p>\n
\t      “It  is  not in dispute that  the\t petitioners
\n\t      have  a  wholesale dealers’ licence  to  stock
\n\t      drugs at Bombay and have a further licence  to
\n\t      distribute  the  drugs through the  motor\t van
\n\t      throughout  the  territory of  the  state,  of
\n\t      Maharashtra.   Accordingly,  their  motor\t van
\n\t      started  filled  with drugs  and\treached\t the
\n\t      Vidarbha area.  The petitioners booked certain
\n\t      drugs for which they have already a licence to
\n\t      distribute, by lorry to Yeotmal.\tThe idea was
\n\t      that  the\t motor van, which  was\ttouring\t the
\n\t      Vidarbba\tarea, should reach Yeotmal by  about
\n\t      the time when the goods were due to arrive and
\n\t      the  person in charge. of the motor van  would
\n\t      collect the drugs so booked from the lorry and
\n\t      distribute  them as per instructions given  by
\n\t      the firm.\t But unfortunately the motor van was
\n\t      delayed  by  about three days and one  of\t the
\n\t      partners of the petitioner-firm who was moving
\n\t      with the van, went ahead of Yeotmal,  released
\n\t      the  goods  from the  transport  operator\t and
\n\t      temporarily kept them in the godown of a local
\n\t      drugs  dealer.  The intention was to load\t the
\n\t      van with those drugs and distribute the  drugs
\n\t      as permitted by the licence.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      In the appeal in this Court, these facts\thave
\n\t      been found as pleaded by the accused  persons.
\n\t      However, it is held that the temporary deposit
\n\t      of  the goods in the godown of a\tlocal  drugs
\n\t      dealer  amounts  to  stocking  for  sale(\t  as
\n\t      contemplated  by clause (c) of section  18  of
\n\t      the Drugs
\n\t      (1)   3\tCD.   Ref.  7  a  Maxwell   on\t the
\n\t      interpretation of Statutes-12 Edition. 40.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      289<\/span><\/p>\n
\t      and  Cosmetic Act, 1940.\tFor the\t purpose  of
\n\t      stocking\tthe  drugs, either for sale  or\t for
\n\t      distribution,,  the  accused  persons  had  no
\n\t      licence  for the premises at Yeotmal and\tthis
\n\t      act amounted to a breach of the conditions  of
\n\t      the  licence and, as such, breach of rule\t 62,
\n\t      amounting to an ,offence under section 27\t (b)
\n\t      of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940.
\n\t      The  point,  whether a  temporary\t deposit  of
\n\t      drugs  or\t temporary retention of drugs  in  a
\n\t      place  outside  Bombay  for  which  place\t the
\n\t      petitioners  have\t no  licence  to  stock\t the
\n\t      ,goods,  amounts\tto  stocking  for  sale\t  or
\n\t      distribution, is a point ,of law which appears
\n\t      to us of general importance.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      The appellant has been concurrently  convicted
\n\t\t\t    but\t hopefully challenged.\tSec. 18 (e
\n) of  the
\n\t      Act  forbids manufacture for sale or  sell  or
\n\t      stock  or exhibit for sale, or distribute\t any
\n\t      drug  without licence under this Chapter\t(Ch.
\n\t      IV).   Sec. 27 (b) is the penal provision\t for
\n\t      ,contravention of the provisions of Ch.  IV of
\n\t      the Act or the rules made thereunder.  Rule 62
\n\t      is claimed to have been violated and so may be
\n\t      read here together with the sister rule,\ti.e.
\n\t      R. 61
\n\t      “61.  Forms of licences to sell drugs-\n<\/p>\n
\t      (1  ) A licence to sell, stock or exhibit\t for
\n\t      sale,  or\t distribute drugs other\t than  those
\n\t      specified in Schedules C and C (1) by  retail,
\n\t      on restricted licence or by wholesale shall be
\n\t      issued  in Form 20, 20-A or 20-B as  the\tcase
\n\t      may be.\n<\/p>\n
\t      Provided that a licence in form 20-A shall  be
\n\t      valid for only such drugs as are specified  in
\n\t      the licence :\n<\/p>\n
\t      (2)   A licence to sell, stock or exhibit\t for
\n\t      sale,   or  distribute  drugs   specified\t  in
\n\t      Schedules C and C(1) by retail, on  restricted
\n\t      licence  or  by wholesale shall be  issued  in
\n\t      Form 21, 21-A or 21-B as the case may be
\n\t      Provided that, a licence in form 21 A shall be
\n\t      valid for only such drugs as are specified  in
\n\t      the licence.\n<\/p>\n
62.  Sale  at  more  than one place-If\tdrugs  are  sold  or
\nstocked\t  for  sale  at\t more  than  one   place,   separate
\napplication  shall be made, and a separate licence shall  be
\nissued, in respect of each such place :\n<\/p>\n
Provided that this shall not apply to itinerant vendors\t who
\nhave no specified place of business and who will be licensed
\nto  conduct  business  in  a  particular  area\twithin\t the
\njurisdiction of the licensing authority.”
\nThe appellant is a wholesale dealer and distributor-and\t has
\na  licence  for his Bombay shop in Form 20B and\t another  in
\nForm  21B, one for drugs specified in C and C (1)  Schedules
\nand the other for other drugs (Ex. 37 and 38).\tThe firm has
\none   more  licence  issued  under  R.61(2)  in\t  Form\t 21B
\nauthorising it to sell, stock or exhibit for
\n290<\/span>
\nSale or distribute by wholesale on the premises situated  at
\nthrough\t Station  Vagan\t No.  No.  1279\t in  the  state\t  of
\nMaharashtra, the following categories of drugs specified  in
\nSchedule C and C(1) to the Drug Rules, 1945 :-
\nCategories  of drugs : for items of Schedule C(1) drugs\t not
\nrequiring Cold Storage.\n<\/p>\n
2.This licence shall be in force for two years from  the
\ndate of issue of this licence.\n<\/p>\n
3.This licence is subject to the conditions stated  below
\nand to, the Provisions of the Drugs Act, 1940 and the  rules
\nthereunder.\n<\/p>\n
The  question  is  whether  the, act  of  the  appellant  in
\ntemporarily storing drugs, not for immediate sale there\t but
\nintended  for ultimate sale in various, parts of the  State,
\nis contrary to sec. 18(c) and punishable under Sec. 27\t(b)?
\nEven  if  it is, can Ex. 39, which  permitted  stocking\t and
\nselling\t in the specified vehicle of the accused, cover\t the
\nbrief  interval of storage between taking delivery from\t the
\nrailway\t or  other  public transport and  loading  into\t the
\nappellant’s mobile van
\n Agreeing  with the High Court, we may make short shrift  of
\nthe second contention first.  If a brief storage for sale in
\nthe  circumstances   of this case necessitates a  licence  a
\nlegal issue we will examine separately-does Ex. 39 fill\t the
\nbill  ? A licence in terms for a vehicle cannot do duty\t for
\none to keep drugs in a fixed place.  The grievance  assuming
\nit to be real, that none of the prescribed forms provide for
\nan  itinerant  wholesale distributor or that it would  be  a
\nfantastic  impossibility  to furnish  the  possible  places-
\nlikely\tto be numerous-where for short intervals  drugs\t may
\nhave  to  be stored awaiting the arrival of the van,  is  no
\ndefence.  If the law asks for a licence for a place and\t you
\ndo  not\t have it and still keep the articles there  you\t are
\nasking\tfor  criminal  trouble,\t whether  it  is  a  stopgap
\nstocking or not.  The arguments ab inconvenienti affords  no
\nanswer.\t  The.\t Act mandates the taking of  a\tlicence\t for
\nevery  place  where you stock drugs for sale, the  words  of
\nSec.18(v)  and\trule  62 being plain  and  admitting  of  no
\nexceptions. you ask four questions. is it a drug?  If it is,
\nis  it\tstored in a place or, is it in transit ?  If  it  is
\nstored\tin  a place, is the storage for sale?  If it  is,  a
\nlicence\t for that place half way house, may be is the,\tonly
\nanswer to a prosecution.  There is none here, ex  confession
\nof  course,  what looms large then is as to whether  such  a
\nstop  gap  storing is one for sale even if,  admittedly.  no
\nsale is intended in that drug shelter ?\n<\/p>\n
Counsel for the State Shri Bhandare counters the argument of
\nabsence\t of prescribed forms and difficulties in  mentioning
\nmany  places  for temporary storage of drugs, in  two  ways.
\nFirstly,  statutory  forms are samples\tfor  guidance,\tnot-
\nexhaustive prescriptions unamenable to addition modification
\nor improvisation as the circumstances require.\tThe forms in
\nthe  appendices to the Civil Procedure Code illustrate\tthis
\npoint  of course, it is not as sample as that  Sec.18  which
\nregulates  manufacture\tand sale of  drugs  prohibits  these
\nactivities,  “except  under  and  in  accordance  with\t the
\nconditions  of a licence issued for such purpose……..  No
\ninflexible formula nor petrified
\n291<\/span>
\nform  is built into the section, suitable forms dictated  by
\npragmatic  considerations and conditions of  business  being
\nnot ruled out.\tThe rules, however, are a little confusing
\nRule 2(b) defines ‘Form’ as a form set forth in Sch.  A\t and
\ndoes  not  profess  to be  illustrative\t and  that  Schedule
\napplies\t 6  forms  under  R. 61 (1) and\t (2)  and  none\t for
\nperipatetic wholesale distributors who may transport to\t and
\nstock  in  central places and radiate from there  to  remote
\nretailers.  The licence Ex. 39 for the accused’s vehicle  is
\nan  improvised\tinnovation without the law but\tprompted  by
\npractical  sense.   The\t sub-rules  of\tRs.  61\t state\tthat
\nlicences there under shall be issued in forms 20A, B and  C,
\n21A, B and C. Rule 62 leaves no room for variations to\tsuit
\nexigencies  although  its  proviso  envisages  licences\t for
\nitinerant vendors for an area and R 62A takes cognisance  of
\ntravelling agents and itinerant vendors who are required  to
\ntake  licences in Form 21A.  But it is a glaring  deficiency
\nthat  while  the  rules\t visualise  wholesale\tdistribution
\nlicences the forms do not spell out licences for mobile vans
\nor   distribution  depots  so  essential  for  a   wholesale
\ndistribution system.  There is no doubt that if a scientific
\nsystem\tof over-seeing wholesale distribution and  a  viable
\nscheme of protected distribution is to be devised,  licences
\nfor  large and well equipped conveyances and storage  depots
\nis  desirable, nay, necessary.\tIndeed, storage\t in  transit
\nmust also be licensed so that medicines do not suffer in the
\nprocess.  At present, no rules take care of transit by\troad
\nor   rail.   Actually,\tcold  storage\tor   air-conditioned
\nfacilities   for   sensitive   medicines   are\t scarce\t  in
\nnationalised  and private transport services and  the  drugs
\nlegislation winks at it.  Likewise, the forms do not provide
\nfor  storage depots or medical vans for wholesale  supplies.
\nSocial guilt attaches to legal lacunae, the community  being
\nthe  victim.   Arguments in this case  have  exposed  these,
\nshortfalls  in\tthe law and we state  them  for\t legislative
\nattention.\n<\/p>\n
The  statutory scheme does provide for retail and  wholesale
\nsales  and storages for sale.  It does prescribe  forms\t for
\nitinerant   retailers\tfor  specified\t areas,\t  travelling
\nrepresentatives supplying samples and the like.\t But storage
\nfor sale in mobile wagons or vans resorted to by wholesalers
\nis  not expressly covered by statutory forms.  That  is\t why
\nEx.  39\t is  an adaptation not found in\t the  fasciculus  of
\nprescribed  forms.  There is no express power to modify\t the
\nforms conferred by the rules, or innovate according to need,
\ndesirable  though  it is.  As the law now  stands,  we\tare,
\ndisinclined to invalidate Ex. 39. on the other hand, the Act
\nand the rules must prevail over the forms and, therefore, we
\nare  inclined to overlook the technical deficiencies in\t the
\nrules and, bending the law to save life, uphold the  implied
\nauthority  to  grant suitable licences under R.\t 61  and  62
\n(proviso)  even\t if liberties have to be  taken\t with  those
\ngiven  in  Schedule  A. This Will extend to  grant  of\tsuch
\nlicences  for  way side depots or ’emergency’  stores.\t But
\nlicences there must be for every storage for sale (S. 18(C).
\nSri  Manchanda’s plea’ that licences should not be  insisted
\non for every place of make-shift storage in a far-flung area
\nserved\tby  a wholesaler may look  reasonable.\t The  police
\npower of the State is
\n292<\/span>
\nexercised  to  ensure  safe and potent drugs  for  a  people
\npeculiarly  susceptible to ailments and largely ignorant  of
\nhealth hazards.\t The paramount purpose of regulation through
\nlicensing is, inter alia, to set in motion vigilant  medical
\nwatch over the proper protection of drugs and medicines\t and
\nthe  verification  of  the  expiry of  their  life  and\t the
\nspuriousness of the products.  If godowns, temporary  stores
\nand  depots  can  remain unlicensed,  they  escape  official
\nattention  and\tcan  deteriorate into  foci  of\t dubious  or
\ndeceptive  drugs  harmful  to society.\t Every\tplace  where
\nstorage\t for  sale is made must be licensed.   That  is\t the
\nplain  meaning\tof Sec. 18 (c) in fulfillment of  the  clear
\npurpose, the sensitive defence of the sick.
\nThe  only surviving issue is whether the medicines  in\tthis
\ncase  were  stocked  for sale in the  house  of\t Jaswani  at
\nYootmal.   Admittedly, they were kept not for sale in  those
\npremises.   Admittedly, they were meant for sale  eventually
\nto rural retailers elsewhere.  If so, were they stocked\t for
\nsale?\tEither contention has some claims to acceptance\t but
\nwhat  must tilt the balance is the purpose of the,  statute,
\nits  potential\tfrustration and judicial  avoidance  of\t the
\nmischief  by a construction whereby the means  of  licensing
\nmeet  the ends of ensuring pure and potent remedies for\t the
\npeople.\t  This liberty with language is sanctified by  great
\njudges\tand  textbooks.\t Maxwell(1) instructs  us  in  these
\nwords :-\n<\/p>\n
\t      “There  is  no doubt that ‘the office  of\t the
\n\t      Judge  is, to make such construction  as\twill
\n\t      suppress the mischief, and advance the remedy,
\n\t      and   to\t suppress  all\tevasions   for\t the
\n\t      continuance  of  the mischief.’ To  carry\t out
\n\t      effectually  the object of a statute, it\tmust
\n\t      be  so construed as to defeat all attempts  to
\n\t      do, or avoid doing, in an indirect or  circui-
\n\t      tous  manner that which it has  prohibited  or
\n\t      enjoined : quando liquid prohibit,  prohibetur
\n\t      et omne per quod devenitur ad illud.
\n\t      This  manner of construction has two  aspects.
\n\t      One  is  that  the  courts,  mindful  of\t the
\n\t      mischief\trule, will not be astute  to  narrow
\n\t      the language of a statute so as to allow\tper-
\n\t      sons  within  its purview to escape  its\tnet.
\n\t      The  other is that the statute may  be-applied
\n\t      to the substance rather than the mere form  of
\n\t      transactions,  thus defeating any\t shifts\t and
\n\t      contrivances which parties may have devised in
\n\t      the  hope of thereby falling outside the\tAct.
\n\t      When   the   courts   find   an\tattempt\t  at
\n\t      concealment, they will, in the words of Wilson
\n\t      C.J., ‘brush away the cobweb varnish, and chew
\n\t      the transactions in their true light.”
\n\t      This  benignant rule originated  four  hundred
\n\t      years ago in Heydon’s case which resolved
\n\t      “that for the sure and true interpretation  of
\n\t      all  statutes  in general (be  they  penal  or
\n\t      beneficial,  restrictive or enlarging  of\t the
\n\t      common  law) four things are to  be  discerned
\n\t      and  considered : (1st).\tWhat was the  common
\n\t      law before
\n\t      (1)   Marwell   on   the\t Interpretation\t  of
\n\t      Statutes-12th Edition p. 137.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      293<\/span><\/p>\n
\t      the  making  of the Act. (2nd)  What  was\t the
\n\t      mischief. and defect for which the common\t law
\n\t      did  not\tprovide.  (3rd).   What\t remedy\t the
\n\t      Parliament hath resolved and appointed to cure
\n\t      the disease of the commonwealth.\tAnd,  (4th).
\n\t      The  true reason of the remedy; and  then\t the
\n\t      office  of  all the Judges is always  to\tmake
\n\t      such   construction  as  shall  suppress\t the
\n\t      mischief,\t and  advance  the  remedy,  and  to
\n\t      suppress\tsubtle inventions and  evasions\t for
\n\t      continuance  of the mischief, and pro  private
\n\t      commode, and to add force and life to the cure
\n\t      and  remedy, according to the true  intent  of
\n\t      the makers of the Act, pro bono publico.”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
If  any\t godown,  depot\t or premises  become  the  nidus  of
\nspurious. time-expired or unscientifically stored drugs, can
\nthey be allowed to escape the coils of the penal law on\t the
\nplea that they are not to be sold there, without great peril
\nto  patients? Then legal shelter for spurious  drug  rackets
\nwould be judicially ensured. And this colours  construction.
\nStocked for sale there and then? or to be sold certainly but
\nelsewhere later ? are the two alternatives flowing from\t the
\nlanguage  of  Sec.     18(1) (c). The former  permits  abuse
\nthrough,  loopholes,  the latter tightens up but  loads\t the
\ndealer with expenses and need for more licences. Since\trisk
\nto life and health is avoided by the latter  interpretation,
\nwe  hold that the storage, even though for short spells\t and
\non ad hoc basis and without intent to sell at that place but
\nas  part  of the sales business, comes within the  scope  of
\nstorage\t for sale’ in Sec. 1.8(c) and R. 62. To\t loosen\t the
\nlaw  in its joints is to play with life and therefore  anti-
\nhumanist.\n<\/p>\n
     On\t the admitted facts, the offence is not serious.  On
\nthe  face  of  it,  the\t law  is  a  little  defective.\t Our
\ninterpretation\tmakes the accused guilty and  clarifies\t the
\nlegal position although the Central Government will do\twell
\nto tidy up and tighten the provisions by a close second look
\nat  the\t law in the book. We need hardly say that a  law  is
\neffective not by making it perfect on paper but by providing
\na sufficient and conscientious cadre of officers.\n<\/p>\n
     The sentence is light but here it is enough. We dismiss
\nthe appeal for the reasons above set out.\n<\/p>\n
V. P. S.\n<\/p>\n
Appeal dismissed.\n<\/p>\n
294<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India Swantraj & Ors vs State Of Maharashtra on 5 February, 1974 Equivalent citations: 1974 AIR 517, 1974 SCR (3) 287 Author: V Krishnaiyer Bench: Krishnaiyer, V.R. PETITIONER: SWANTRAJ & ORS. Vs. RESPONDENT: STATE OF MAHARASHTRA DATE OF JUDGMENT05\/02\/1974 BENCH: KRISHNAIYER, V.R. BENCH: KRISHNAIYER, V.R. SARKARIA, RANJIT SINGH CITATION: 1974 AIR 517 […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-4586","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"\nSwantraj & Ors vs State Of Maharashtra on 5 February, 1974 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/swantraj-ors-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-5-february-1974\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Swantraj & Ors vs State Of Maharashtra on 5 February, 1974 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/swantraj-ors-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-5-february-1974\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"1974-02-04T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-02-18T13:12:52+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"17 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/swantraj-ors-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-5-february-1974#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/swantraj-ors-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-5-february-1974\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Swantraj & Ors vs State Of Maharashtra on 5 February, 1974\",\"datePublished\":\"1974-02-04T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-02-18T13:12:52+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/swantraj-ors-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-5-february-1974\"},\"wordCount\":2860,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/swantraj-ors-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-5-february-1974#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/swantraj-ors-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-5-february-1974\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/swantraj-ors-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-5-february-1974\",\"name\":\"Swantraj & Ors vs State Of Maharashtra on 5 February, 1974 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1974-02-04T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-02-18T13:12:52+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/swantraj-ors-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-5-february-1974#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/swantraj-ors-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-5-february-1974\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/swantraj-ors-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-5-february-1974#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Swantraj & Ors vs State Of Maharashtra on 5 February, 1974\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Swantraj & Ors vs State Of Maharashtra on 5 February, 1974 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/swantraj-ors-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-5-february-1974","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Swantraj & Ors vs State Of Maharashtra on 5 February, 1974 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/swantraj-ors-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-5-february-1974","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1974-02-04T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-02-18T13:12:52+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"17 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/swantraj-ors-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-5-february-1974#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/swantraj-ors-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-5-february-1974"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Swantraj & Ors vs State Of Maharashtra on 5 February, 1974","datePublished":"1974-02-04T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-02-18T13:12:52+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/swantraj-ors-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-5-february-1974"},"wordCount":2860,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/swantraj-ors-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-5-february-1974#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/swantraj-ors-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-5-february-1974","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/swantraj-ors-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-5-february-1974","name":"Swantraj & Ors vs State Of Maharashtra on 5 February, 1974 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1974-02-04T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-02-18T13:12:52+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/swantraj-ors-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-5-february-1974#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/swantraj-ors-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-5-february-1974"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/swantraj-ors-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-5-february-1974#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Swantraj & Ors vs State Of Maharashtra on 5 February, 1974"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4586","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=4586"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4586\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=4586"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=4586"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=4586"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}