28. A similar view taken by the Gujarat High Court in the case of Vinod Rao Vs. State of Gujarat, was considered and approved by the Supreme Court in the decision in Aires Rodrigues (supra). Referring to the provisions contained under Section 484 of the Code of 1973 as well as Section 8(1) of the General Clauses Act, 1897, it was held that in terms of the aforestated provisions, a Notification which may have been issued under the Code of 1898 would be saved and the repeal of the Code of 1898 and its replacement by the Code of 1973 would not affect the situation. The judgement of the Full Bench of this court in
Mata Sewak Upadhyay (supra) was also approved.

29. In view of the position of law having been clarified in the decision in the case of Aires Rodrigues (supra) and the view taken by the Full Bench in the case of Mata Sewak Upadhyay (supra) with regard to the validity of the Notification dated 31.7.1989 issued by the State Government making the offence under Section 506 as cognizable and non-bailable, having been approved, the controversy with regard to the question stands settled.

30. That being the legal position, the investigation into the offence pursuant to lodging of the F.I.R. under Sections 504 and 506 of the Penal Code and the placing of the police report under Section 173 thereof, upon which cognizance was taken by the Magistrate and process has been issued, cannot be said to suffer from any illegality so as to persuade this court to exercise its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code.