Interpretation of Statutes-Central Act on a subject in Concurrent List amended by State Act-State Act enhanced punishment--A later Central Amendment Act with respect to the same matter reduced the punishment-State amendment if impliedly repealed-Repeal followed by fresh legislation-Section 6 of General Clauses Act-If applicable.

For committing an offence under section 16(1)(a) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, as it stood on March 1, 1972, the maximum punishment prescribed was imprisonment for six years and fine. Section 21 of the Act provided that such offences were triable by a Presidency Magistrate or Magistrate First Class. By the Prevention of Adulteration of Food, Drugs and Cosmetics (West Bengal Amendment) Act, 1973, enacted by the State Legislature of West Bengal, the maximum punishment for an offence under this section had been enhanced to imprisonment for life, as a result of which an offence committed under the section in the State of West Bengal became exclusively triable by a court of sessions. The Amendment Act received the assent of the President and came into force from April 29, 1974. In 1976 Parliament amended the Food Adulteration Act and the amendment came into force with effect from April 1, 1976. For offences punishable under section 16(1)(a) the Amendment Act provided for a reduced punishment for a term of three years instead of six years as before. By the same Amendment Act section 16A was inserted in the Act providing that all offences under section 16(1) shall be tried in a summary way by a Judicial Magistrate, First Class, or by a Metropolitan Magistrate.

On September 24, 1975 the appellant lodged a complaint against the respondent for having committed an offence punishable under section 16(1)(a) read with section 7 of the Act. On the date of the commission of the alleged offence the law in force in the State of West Bengal was the 1954 Act as amended by the West Bengal Amendment Act.

Purporting to follow the decision of a single Judge of the Calcutta High Court in B. Manna and Ors. v. State of West Bengal, (81 C.W.N. 1075) in which it was held that the Central Amendment Act was not intended to be retrospective in operation because it had not expressly repealed the West Bengal amendment nor dealt with the Act or any of its provisions in any manner, the Magistrate held that the case was triable by the Court of Sessions.

Disagreeing with the view of the single Judge, a Divsion Bench of the High Court held that after the Central Amendment Act came into force on April 1, 1976 all proceedings pending for trial of offences punishable under s. 16(1)(a) as amended by the West Bengal Act which had not been concluded, would cease to be governed by the West Bengal Amendment Act and would come within the purview of the Central Act as amended by the Central Amendment Act and that therefore such offences committed prior to the amendment were triable in accordance with the procedure under s. 16A as amended by the Central Amendment Act.

On the question whether the previous operation of the repealed West Bengal Amendment Act in respect of any liability incurred thereunder is preserved by s. 8 of the Bengal General Clauses Act, 1899 which is in pari matorja with s. 6 of the General Clauses Act, 1897 both as to procedure for trial of such offences and the nature of punishment liable to be imposed.