The Public Prosecutor vs Mahommad Abdullah and Another

Lakshmana Rao, J.—This is an appeal by the Provincial Government against the appellate order of acquittal of the respondents of an

offence u/s 30(3) read with Section 25(2)(b) of the Indian Emigration Act.

The respondents were running a vidhuthi or rest house at Negapatam and as found by the Courts below, P.Ws. 1 to 5, the unskilled labourers

who were bound for Penang and lodging in the vidhuthi were not permitted to embark at Negapatam. Their steamer fares were refunded and the

respondents offered to send them to Penang by a French steamer from Karaikal. P.Ws. 1 to 5 paid the required amount to the first respondent

and he secured the steamer tickets and sent them to Karaikal with the second respondent. The second respondent saw them safely into the boats

which took them to the steamer and as urged by the Public Prosecutor the respondents undoubtedly assisted P.Ws. 1 to 5 to depart by land out of

British Indiaso as to depart for the purpose of working for hire in a country beyond the sea which is made punishable u/s 30(3) read with Section

25(2)(b) of the Indian Emigration Act. The view of the Joint Magistrate that assistance means either financial assistance or entering into an

agreement to work for hire is unwarranted and the order of acquittal is unsustainable.

The order of acquittal is therefore set aside and the respondents are convicted u/s 30(3) read with Section 25(2)(b) of the Emigration Act. The

offence is serious and the respondents were sentenced to a fine of Rs. 100 each by the trial Court. They are therefore sentenced to a fine of Rs.

100 each with simple imprisonment for six weeks in default and one month is allowed for payment.