Repeal and saving

Related judgements & precedents

These are some judgments that construed this section, and hold precedence value. They hold authority on how to read, interpret and use this section.

1. Vasant Arjunrao Bhandak vs State of Karnataka

   Supreme Court of India 12 Nov 2002 Binding (SC)

   Court's Decision & Legal Precedent

   A notification issued under Section 26 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1952 appointing a Special Judge for a specified area to try offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 shall be deemed to be a valid appointment of a Special Judge under Section 3 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 for that area, and such appointment extends to all cases under the 1988 Act, not merely to cases pending at the time of commencement of the 1988 Act. The deeming fiction created by Section 26 read with Section 30(2) of the 1988 Act operates to validate old appointments for new cases without requiring fresh notifications.

   On this section: Repeal and saving provision; Court used this to support the deeming fiction interpretation, holding that actions under repealed Acts are deemed to be under corresponding provisions of 1988 Act

   Read the full order on eCourts India

2. State of Punjab vs Harnek Singh

   Supreme Court of India 15 Feb 2002 Binding (Supreme Court)

   Court's Decision & Legal Precedent

   Where a penal statute is repealed and re-enacted with similar or expanded provisions dealing with the same subject matter, and the saving provision in the re-enacting statute refers to the General Clauses Act, Section 24 of the General Clauses Act (which applies to repealed and re-enacted Acts) continues to apply unless explicitly excluded. Accordingly, notifications, orders, and administrative authorizations issued under the repealed statute continue in force under the re-enacted statute if not inconsistent with its provisions, and such notifications are deemed to have been issued under the re-enacted statute unless formally superseded or withdrawn. This applies through the legal fiction created by the saving clause that the new Act was in force when the old actions were taken.

   On this section: Saving clause providing that actions taken under the repealed 1947 Act shall be deemed to have been taken under corresponding provisions of 1988 Act if not inconsistent. Court interpreted this as applying the fiction of continuity to old notifications.

   Read the full order on eCourts India

The holding above is the ratio decidendi as extracted from the judgment by eCourts India, reproduced unaltered — it is a rendering of the court's reasoning, not a substitute for its words. Read the order itself before relying on it.