PANAJI: A prominent question came up for consideration before the sessions court about the applicability and enforceability of the Music and Noises Act in Goa.
The additional sessions judge, Mr B P Deshpande at Panaji made a reference to the High Court of Bombay at Goa on the question whether the Madhya Pradesh Control of Music and Noises Act, 1951(MP Act) as extended to the union territory of Goa is in force in the state.

The issue came up with regard to a night club owner who is now facing trial before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Mapusa under Sections 7 and 8 of M P Act on the allegation that he was found playing loud amplified music without seeking legal permission.
The alleged accused had moved application for his release before the JMFC, Mapusa claiming that that the provisions of M P Act are not in force in Goa and the same is impliedly repealed by the Environment Protection Act, 1986 and the Noise Pollution (Regulation and Control) Rules, 2000 of the central government.
The JMFC, Mapusa, while rejecting the application moved by the alleged accused also held that the provisions of the M P Act are applicable to the state of Goa.
Aggrieved by the order, the alleged accused approached sessions court. Mr Galileo Teles appearing on behalf of the accused contended that although the M P Act, 1951 was extended to the union territory of Goa in the year 1966, but there is no notification issued till date as required in Section 1(3) by the Administrator of Union Territory.
The contention of the accused was fortified by the public prosecutor, who also on information submitted that no such notification has been issued under Section 1(3) of the M P Act.
“The accused has raised a question regarding the validity of an Act in the state of Goa and the determination of which is necessary for the disposal of the case as the accused has got every right under Article 20(1) of the Constitution not to be prosecuted for any commission or omission which is not considered as violation of law at the time of commission of such act,” court observed.
Accordingly, the additional sessions court formulated questions and made reference to the High Court under Section 395 of CrPC.