Regions & Countries



AIR 1952 Cal 838

Year Decided



Calcutta HC    India    


Petitioner was convicted under the Influx from Pakistan (Control) Act 1949 for overstaying his permit in India. He was arrested in 1949. The petitioner claimed that he was a citizen of India under Articles 5 and 6 of the Constitution, having been born in India and worked. He had also applied for a permanent permit. The court held that the application of Articles 5 and 6 in this case was incorrect since the arrest was made before the Constitution had come into force. Articles 5, 6 and 7 were not in operation at the date of his arrest. The petitioner's argument, that he had applied for an extension to his permit, which was pending, and therefore should get him an extension was denied. The court found that the extension had been applied for the permanent permit, which did not entitle him to the extension on pendency. It was also held that under Section 5 of the Act, the men's rea necessary to commit an offence is that infringement must not be one that takes place due to circumstances beyond the control of the accused. It was found to be the case here that such circumstances were not there, and therefore, men's rea was present. The petitioner was convicted.

Supporting institutions