AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
We think there can be no doubt but that the accused broke the law. We do not wish to cast any reflections upon his saintly character or impute to him any intention of indecency. The law, however, is framed much more in the interests of the general public than in that of ecstatic and religious eccentrics who may have their own ideas of public propriety. If this were clearly borne in mind, we should be spared the repetition of such arguments as have been addressed to us today on behalf of the accused. No man is above the law. That is enacted for the benefit of the whole community and however innocent the accused''s intentions may have been-and we are willing to concede that they were-however tolerantly his acts may have been viewed by those who know and revere him, if he frequents public places in a city like Nasik, in a state of nudity, he may at any time give just cause of offence to other members of the public not acquainted with him who may meet him in that state. We think, therefore, that a technical offence is proved against the accused.
We direct that he be convicted u/s 61(o) of the Bombay District Police Act and we fine him rupee one.
We might suggest that the better instructed of those who revere his character should advise him of the grounds upon which so much restraint is placed upon his own judgment.