35. The two later Constitution Bench judgments also did not have the benefit of the aforesaid exposition of the law. It is clear that even an implied repeal of a statute would fall within the expression "repeal" in Section 6 of the General Clauses Act. This is for the reason given by the Constitution Bench in M.A. Tulloch & Company that only the form of repeal differs but there is no difference in intent or substance. If even an implied repeal is covered by the expression "repeal", it is clear that repeals may take any form and so long as a statute or part of it is obliterated, such obliteration would be covered by the expression "repeal" in Section 6 of the General Clauses Act.
36. In fact in Halsbury's Laws of England, Fourth Edn., it is stated that:
"So far as express repeal is concerned, it is not necessary that any particular form of words should be used. (R v. Longmead (1795) 2 Leach 694 : 168 ER 448, Leach at 696). All that is required is that an intention to abrogate the enactment or portion in question should be clearly shown. [Thus, whilst the formula "is hereby repealed" is frequently used, it is equally common for it to be provided that an enactment "shall cease to have effect" (or, If not yet in operation, "shall not have effect") or that a particular portion of an enactment "shall be omitted]."
37. At this stage, it is important to note that a temporary statute does not attract the provision of Section 6 of the General Clauses Act only for the reason that the said statute expires by itself after the period for which it has been promulgated ends. In such cases, there is no repeal for the reason that the legislature has not applied its mind to a live statute and obliterated it. In all cases where a temporary statute expires, the statute expires of its own force without being obliterated by a subsequent legislative enactment. But even in this area, if a temporary statute is in fact repealed at a point of time earlier than its expiry, it has been held that Section 6 of the General Clauses Act would apply. (See: State of Punjab v. Mohar Singh AIR 1955 SC 84 SCR at p. 898.)
38. In CIT v. Venkateswara Hatcheries (P) Ltd. (1999 3 SCC 632), this CBI Vs. M/s Vikash Metal & Power Ltd. & Ors., Judgment dated 30.11.2018 Page No. 440 of 467 Court was faced with an omission and re-enactment of two Sections of the Income Tax Act. This Court found that Section 24 of the General Clauses Act would apply to such omission and re-enactment. The Court has stated as follows: (SCC p. 638, para 12) "12. As noticed earlier, the omission of Section 2(27) and re- enactment of Section 80-JJ was done simultaneously. It is a very well-recognized rule of interpretation of statutes that where a provision of an Act is omitted by an Act and the said Act simultaneously re-enacts a new provision which substantially covers the field occupied by the repealed provision with certain modification, in that event such re- enactment is regarded having force continuously and the modification or changes are treated as amendment coming into force with effect from the date of enforcement of the re-enacted provision."
(Emphasis supplied by me)
527. Subsequently the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the Fibre Board case (Supra) again come up for consideration in the case Shree Bhagwati Steel Rolling Mills (Supra). It would be thus appropriate to reproduce the observations of Hon'ble Supreme Court as were made in the said case also:
"10. Since Shri Aggarwal has made detailed submissions on why according to him the judgment in Fibre Board's case is not correctly decided, we propose to deal with each of those submissions in some detail.
11. First and foremost, it is important to refer to the definition of "enactment" contained in Section 3(19) of the General Clauses Act. The said definition clause states that "enactment" shall mean the following:
"3. (19) 'enactment' shall include a Regulation (as hereinafter defined) and any Regulation of the Bengal, Madras or Bombay Code, and shall also include any provision contained in any Act or in any such Regulation as aforesaid.
CBI Vs. M/s Vikash Metal & Power Ltd. & Ors., Judgment dated 30.11.2018 Page No. 441 of 467
12. From this it is clear that when Section 6 of the General Clauses Act speaks of the repeal of any enactment, it refers not merely to the enactment as a whole but also to any provision contained in any Act. Thus, it is clear that if a part of a statute is deleted, Section 6 would nonetheless apply. Secondly, it is clear, as has been stated by referring to a passage in Halsbury's Laws of England in the Fibre Board's judgment, that the expression "omission" is nothing but a particular form of words evincing an intention to abrogate an enactment or portion thereof. This is made further clear by the Legal Thesaurus (Deluxe Edition) by William C Burton, 1979 Edition.
Likewise the expression "omit" is also defined by this Thesaurus as follows:
"Omit:- Abstain from inserting, bypass, cast aside, count out, cut out, delete, discard, dodge, drop exclude, exclude, fail to do, fail to include, fail to insert, fail to mention, leave out, leave undone, let go, let pass, let slip, miss, neglect, omittere, pass over, praetermittere, skip, slight, transire." And the expression "repeal" is defined as follows: "Repeal: Abolish, abrogare, abrogate, annul, avoid, cancel, countermand, declare null and void, delete, eliminate, formally withdraw, invalidate, make void, negate, nullify, obliterate, officially withdraw, override, overrule, quash, recall, render invalid, rescind, rescindere, retract, reverse, revoke, set aside, vacate, void, withdraw."
13. On a conjoint reading of the three expressions "delete", "omit", and "repeal", it becomes clear that "delete" and "omit" are used interchangeably, so that when the expression "repeal" refers to "delete" it would necessarily take within its ken an omission as well. This being the case, we do not find any substance in the argument that a "repeal" amounts to an obliteration from the very beginning, whereas an "omission" is only in futuro. If the expression "delete" would amount to a "repeal", which the Appellant's counsel does not deny, it is clear that a conjoint reading of Halsbury's Laws of England CBI Vs. M/s Vikash Metal & Power Ltd. & Ors., Judgment dated 30.11.2018 Page No. 442 of 467 and the Legal Thesaurus cited hereinabove both lead to the same result, namely that an "omission" being tantamount to a "deletion" is a form of repeal.
14. Learned Counsel's second argument that Section 6A of the General Clauses Act when it speaks of an "omission" only speaks of an "amendment" which omits and, therefore does not refer to a repeal is equally fallacious. In Bhagat Ram Sharma v. Union of India, this Court held that there is no real distinction between a repeal and an amendment and that "amendment" is in fact a wider term which includes deletion of a provision in an existing statute. In the said judgment, this Court held:
"17. It is a matter of legislative practice to provide while enacting an amending law, that an existing provision shall be deleted and a new provision substituted. Such deletion has the effect of repeal of the existing provision. Such a law may also provide for the introduction of a new provision. There is no real distinction between 'repeal' and an 'amendment'. In Sutherland's Statutory Construction, 3 rd Edn., Vol. 1 at p. 477, the learned author makes the following statement of law:
The distinction between repeal and amendment as these terms are used by the Courts is arbitrary. Naturally the use of these terms by the Court is based largely on how the Legislature have developed and applied these terms in labelling their enactments. When a section is being added to an Act or a provision added to a section, the Legislatures commonly entitled the Act as an amendment....When a provision is withdrawn from a section, the Legislatures call the Act an amendment particularly when a provision is added to replace the one withdrawn. However, when an entire Act or section is abrogated and no new section is added to replace it, Legislatures label the Act accomplishing this result a repeal. Thus as used by the Legislatures, amendment and repeal may differ in kind-addition as opposed to withdrawal or only in degree-abrogation of part of a section as opposed to abrogation of a whole section or Act; or more commonly, in both kind and degree-addition of a provision to a section to replace a provision being abrogated as opposed by abrogation of a whole section of an Act. This arbitrary distinction has been followed by the Courts, and they have developed separate rules of construction for each. However, they have recognised that frequently an Act purporting to be an amendment has the same qualitative effect as a repeal-
CBI Vs. M/s Vikash Metal & Power Ltd. & Ors., Judgment dated 30.11.2018 Page No. 443 of 467 the abrogation of an existing statutory provision-and have therefore applied the term "implied repeal' and the rules of construction applicable to repeals to such amendments.
18. Amendment is in fact, a wider term and it includes abrogation or deletion of a provision in an existing statute. If the amendment of an existing law is small, the Act professes to amend; if it is extensive, it repeals a law and re-enacts it. An amendment of substantive law is not retrospective unless expressly laid down or by necessary' implication inferred.
(emphasis supplied)
15. It is clear, therefore, that when this Court referred to Section 6A of the Generals Clauses Act in Fibre Board's case and held that Section 6A shows that a repeal can be by way of an express omission, obviously what was meant was that an amendment which repealed a provision could do so by way of an express omission. This being the case, it is clear that Section 6A undisputedly leads to the conclusion that a repeal would include a repeal by way of an express omission.
16. The Learned Counsel then argued that while distinguishing the Madhya Pradesh High Court's judgment in Rayala Corporation, a Constitution Bench of this Court expressly held as the first reason that Section 6 applies only to repeals and not to omissions. The Fibre Board's judgment has clearly held as follows:
"31. First and foremost, it will be noticed that two reasons were given in Rayala Corporation (P) Ltd. for distinguishing the Madhya Pradesh High Court judgment. Ordinarily, both reasons would form the ratio decidendi for the said decision and both reasons would be binding upon us. But we find that once it is held that Section 6 of the General Clauses Act would itself not apply to a rule which is subordinate legislation as it applies only to a Central Act or Regulation, it would be wholly unnecessary to state that on a construction of the word "repeal" in Section 6 of the General Clauses Act, "omissions" made by the legislature would not be included. Assume, on the other hand, that the Constitution Bench had given two reasons for the non-applicability of Section 6 of the General Clauses Act. In such a situation, obviously both reasons would be ratio decidendi and would be binding upon a subsequent bench. However, once it is found that Section 6 itself would not apply, it would be wholly superfluous to further state that on an interpretation of the word "repeal", an CBI Vs. M/s Vikash Metal & Power Ltd. & Ors., Judgment dated 30.11.2018 Page No. 444 of 467 "omission" would not be included. We are, therefore, of the view that the second so-called ratio of the Constitution Bench in Rayala Corporation (P) Ltd. cannot be said to be a ratio decidendi at all and is really in the nature of obiter dicta."
17. Merely because the Constitution Bench referred to a repeal not amounting to an omission as the first reason given for distinguishing the Madhya Pradesh High Court's judgment would not undo the effect of ITR para 27 SCC para 31 of Fibre Board's case which, as has already been stated, clearly makes the distinction between Section 6 not applying at all and Section 6 being construed in a particular manner. Obviously, if the Section were not to apply at all, any construction of the Section would necessarily be in the nature of obiter dicta.
18. We also find that Section 6 of the General Clauses Act could not possibly apply to the facts in Rayala Corporation's case for yet another reason. Clause 2 of Rule 132-A of the Defence of India (amendment) Rules, 1965 which was referred to in para 14 of the judgment in Rayala Corporation reads as follows:
"14. ....'132-A. (2) In the Defence of India Rules, 1962, Rule 132A (relating to prohibition of dealings in foreign exchange) shall be omitted except as respects things done or omitted to be done under that rule.' "
19. A cursory reading of Clause 2 shows that after omitting Rule 132A of the Defence of India Rules, 1962, the provision contains its own saving clause. This being the case, Section 6 can in any case have no application as Section 6 only applies to a Central Act or Regulation "unless a different intention appears". A different intention clearly appears on a reading of Clause 2 as only a very limited savings clause is incorporated therein. In fact, this aspect is noticed by the Constitution Bench in para 18 of its judgment, in which the Constitution Bench states:
"18. ....As we have indicated earlier, the notification of the Ministry of Home Affairs omitting Rule 132-A of the DIRs did not make any such provision similar to that contained in Section 6 of the General Clauses Act."
20. It was then urged before us that Section 31 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 would also lead to the conclusion that Parliament itself is cognizant of the fact that an omission cannot amount to a repeal. Section 31 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, states as follows:
CBI Vs. M/s Vikash Metal & Power Ltd. & Ors., Judgment dated 30.11.2018 Page No. 445 of 467 "31. Omission of certain sections of Act 45 of 1860. - Sections 161 to 165A (both inclusive) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860) shall be omitted, and Section 6 of the General Clauses Act, 1897 (10 of 1897), shall apply to such omission as if the said sections had been repealed by a Central Act."
21. It is settled law that Parliament is presumed to know the law when it enacts a particular piece of legislation. The Prevention of Corruption Act was passed in the year 1988, that is long after 1969 when the Constitution Bench decision in Rayala Corporation had been delivered. It is, therefore, presumed that Parliament enacted Section 31 knowing that the decision in Rayala Corporation had stated that an omission would not amount to a repeal and it is for this reason that Section 31 was enacted. This again does not take us further as this statement of the law in Rayala Corporation is no longer the law declared by the Supreme Court after the decision in the Fibre Board's case. This reason therefore again cannot avail the Appellant.
22. The reference to the savings provision in Section 1 of the Contract Act again does not take us very much further as the expression "repeal" as has been pointed out above can be of part of an enactment also. This being the case, when the legislature uses the word "omit" it usually does so when it wishes to delete a particular section as opposed to deleting an entire Act. As has been noticed both in Fibre Board's case and hereinabove, these are all expressions which only go to form and not to substance."
(Emphasis supplied by me)
528. The Hon'ble Court further went on to observe in Para 23 as under:
"23. Fibre Board's case is a recent judgment which, as has correctly been argued by Shri Radhakrishnan, learned senior Counsel on behalf of the revenue, clarifies the law in holding that an omission would amount to a repeal. The converse view of the law has led to an omitted provision being treated as if it never existed, as Section 6 of the General Clauses Act would not then apply to allow the previous operation of the provision so omitted or anything duly done or suffered CBI Vs. M/s Vikash Metal & Power Ltd. & Ors., Judgment dated 30.11.2018 Page No. 446 of 467 thereunder. Nor may a legal proceeding in respect of any right or liability be instituted, continued or enforced in respect of rights and liabilities acquired or incurred under the enactment so omitted. In the vast majority of cases, this would cause great public mischief, and the decision of Fibre Board's case is therefore clearly delivered by this Court for the public good, being, at the very least a reasonably possible view. Also, no aspect of the question at hand has remained unnoticed. For this reason also we decline to accept Shri Aggarwal's persuasive plea to reconsider the judgment in Fibre Board's case."
529. Thus it has been specifically held by Hon'ble Supreme court that omission of an enactment would amount to repeal of the enactment. The Court while dealing with the meaning of various terms such as "repeal", "amendment" and "omission" also observed that mere use of certain terminologies by the Legislature be it "repeal", "amendment" or "omission" is of no consequence as the effect of the three terms is primarily the same.
Thus from the aforesaid discussion, it is clear that the contention of Ld. defence Counsel that Section 6 of General Clauses Act, 1897 would not have any application to the omission of old section 13 (1) (d) by the Amendment Act, 2018 is clearly not tenable.,
530. Coming now to the second limb of argument that the Legislature by way of Amendment Act, 2018 has expressed its categorical intention that only such offences relating to public servants will be punishable where there is element of quid-pro-quo or undue advantage to the public servant concerned or any attempt has been made by him in this regard. Thus as regard the offence of CBI Vs. M/s Vikash Metal & Power Ltd. & Ors., Judgment dated 30.11.2018 Page No. 447 of 467 criminal misconduct, it was submitted that while deleting the old provision of Section 13 (1) (d) P.C. Act, 1988 and by not re-enacting any such similar provision, the Legislature has clearly expressed its intention that the earlier defined offences u/s 13 (1) (d) P.C. Act 1988 shall no longer be an offence.
531. Before I advert on to deal with the aforesaid contention, it would be appropriate to refer to certain observations of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case State of Punjab Vs Mohar Singh, (Supra). In fact Ld. Defence Counsel has also relied upon the said case in support of his arguments. In case of repeal of a provision by a new Act, Hon'ble Supreme Court while discussing as to whether the rights and liabilities under the repealed law remain alive or not laid down, the line of enquiry as under:
"The line of enquiry would be, not whether the new Act expressly keeps alive old rights and liabilities but whether it manifests an intention to destroy them. We cannot therefore subscribe to the broad proposition that section 6 of the General Clauses Act is ruled out when there is repeal of an enactment followed by a fresh legislation. Section 6 would be applicable in such cases also unless the new legislation manifests an intention incompatible with or contrary to the provisions of the section. Such incompatibility would have to be ascertained from a consideration of all the relevant provisions of the new law and the mere absence of a saving clause is by itself not material. It is in the light of these principles that we now proceed to examine the facts of the present case."
532. The aforesaid observations were also referred to by Hon'ble supreme Court in a recent case titled Gunwantlal Godawat Vs. Union of India and Another (2018) 12 Supreme Court Cases 309. While referring to the observations made in Mohar Singh case CBI Vs. M/s Vikash Metal & Power Ltd. & Ors., Judgment dated 30.11.2018 Page No. 448 of 467 (Supra) Hon'ble Supreme Court observed as under:
"In order to see whether the rights and liabilities under the repealed law have been put an end to by the new enactment, the proper approach is not to enquire if the new enactment has by its new provisions kept alive the rights and liabilities under the repealed law but whether it has taken away those rights and liabilities. The absence of a saving clause in a new enactment preserving the rights and liabilities under the repealed law is neither material nor decisive of the question - see State of Punjab Vs. Mohar Singh AIR 1955 SC 84 and T.S. Baliah V. CIT AIR 1969 SC 701."
533. Thus from the aforesaid observations it is clear that the mere absence of a saving clause in the new enactment preserving the rights and liabilities under the repealed enactment is neither material nor decisive of the question as to whether the rights and liabilities under the repealed law have been put to an end to by the new enactment or not. What is required to be seen is whether the new enactment has taken away those rights and liabilities which were in existence under the repealed law. Thus in order to answer the question as to whether the Amendment Act, 2018 takes away the rights and liabilities which were in existence under the old section 13 (1) (d) or not, it would be appropriate to refer to the objects and reasons which warranted bringing in of the Amendment Act, 2018. The same are clearly instructive of ascertaining the intention of Legislature in bringing in Amendment Act, 2018.
The statement of objects and reasons read as under:
CBI Vs. M/s Vikash Metal & Power Ltd. & Ors., Judgment dated 30.11.2018 Page No. 449 of 467 "The Prevention of Corruption (Amendment) Act, 2018 Statement of Objects and Reasons. - The Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 provides for prevention of corruption and for matters connected therewith. The ratification by India of the United Nations Convention Against Corruption, the international practice on treatment of the offence of bribery and corruption and judicial pronouncements have necessitated a review of the existing provisions of the Act and the need to amend it so as to fill in gaps in description and coverage of the offence of bribery so as to bring it in line with the current international practice and also to meet more effectively, the country's obligations under the aforesaid Convention. Hence, the present Bill.
2. The salient features of the Bill, inter alia, are as follows:-
(a) section 7 of the Act at present covers the offence of public servant taking gratification other than legal remuneration in respect of an official act. The definition of offence is proposed to be substituted by a new comprehensive definition which covers all aspects of passive bribery, including the solicitation and acceptance of bribe through intermediaries and also acts of public servants acting outside their competence;
(b) the Act at present does not contain any provisions directly dealing with active domestic bribery, that is, the offence of giving bribe. Section 12 of the Act which provides for punishment for abetment of offences defined in section 7 or section 11, covers the offence indirectly. Section 24 provides that a statement made by a bribe giver in any proceedings against a public servant for an offence under sections 7 to 11, 13 and 15 of the Act shall not subject him to prosecution under section 12. Experience has shown that in a vast majority of cases, the bribe-giver goes scot free by taking resort to the provisions of section 24 and it becomes increasingly difficult to tackle consensual bribery. The aforesaid Convention enjoins that the promise, offering or giving, to a public official directly or indirectly, of an undue advantage, for the official himself or herself or another person or entity, in order that the official act or refrain from acting in the exercise of his or her official duties, be made a criminal offence. Accordingly, it is proposed to substitute a new section 8 to meet the said obligation;
(c) as the proposed new definitions of bribery, both as regards the solicitation and acceptance of undue advantage and as regards the promise, offering or giving, to a public official, directly or indirectly, of an undue advantage, are CBI Vs. M/s Vikash Metal & Power Ltd. & Ors., Judgment dated 30.11.2018 Page No. 450 of 467 found to be comprehensive enough to cover all offences presently provided in section 8 which covers taking gratification, in order, by corrupt or illegal means, to influence public servant; section 9 which covers taking gratification, for exercise of personal influence with public servant; section 10 which provides for punishment for abetment by public servant of offences defined in section 8 or section 9; and section 11 which provides for public servant obtaining valuable thing without consideration from person concerned in proceeding or business transacted by such public servant; and also the offences presently defined in clauses (a), (b) and (d) of sub- section (1) of section 13 of the Act which covers criminal misconduct by a public servant, it is proposed to omit the said sections;
(d) it is proposed to substitute section 9 to provide punishment for the offence relating to bribing a public servant by a commercial organisation. A commercial organisation will be guilty of this offence if any person associated with it offers, promises or gives a financial or other advantage to a public servant intending to obtain or retain business or some advantage in the conduct of business for the commercial organisation. The proposed section 10 provides for punishment of persons in charge of a commercial organisation which has been guilty of the offence under the proposed section 9;
(e) section 12 at present provides for punishment for abetment of offences defined in section 7 or section 11. It is proposed to substitute section 12 of the Act to provide punishment for abetment of all offences under the Act;
(f) it is proposed to substitute sub-section (1) of section 13 with a new subsection so as to omit the existing clauses (a), (b) and (d) of sub-section (1) as mentioned above; to incorporate the element of intentional enrichment in the existing clause (e) relating to possession of disproportionate assets by a public servant; and to modify the definition of "known sources of income" as contained in Explanation, to mean income received from any lawful source, that is, by doing away with the requirement of intimation in accordance with any law, rules or orders applicable to a public servant;
(g) section 14 at present provides for habitual commission of offences under section 8, 9 and 12. It is proposed to substitute section 14 of the Act to provide punishment for habitual commission of all offences under the Act;
CBI Vs. M/s Vikash Metal & Power Ltd. & Ors., Judgment dated 30.11.2018 Page No. 451 of 467
(h) the Prevention of Corruption Act, at present, does not specifically provide for the confiscation of bribe and the proceeds of bribery. A Bill, namely, the Prevention of Corruption (Amendment) Bill, 2008, to amend the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, providing, inter alia, for insertion of a new Chapter IV-A in the Prevention of Corruption Act for the attachment and forfeiture of property of corrupt public servants on the lines of the Criminal Law (Amendment) Ordinance, 1944, was introduced in the Lok Sabha on 19 th December, 2008 and was passed by the Lok Sabha on 23 rd December, 2008. However, the said Bill lapsed due to dissolution of the Fourteenth Lok Sabha. It is proposed to insert similar provisions on the lines of the 2008 Bill in the Prevention of Corruption Act;
(i) the Prevention of Corruption (Amendment) Bill, 2008 had proposed an amendment to section 19 of the Act on the lines of section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for extending protection of prior sanction of the Government or competent authority after retirement or deminance of office by a public servant so as to provide a safeguard to a public servant from vexatious prosecution for any bona fide omission or commission in the discharge of his official duties. The said Bill having lapsed, this protection is, at present, not available for a person who has ceased to be a public servant. Section 19 is, therefore, proposed to be amended to provide the said protection to the persons who ceased to be public servants on the lines of the said Bill. Further, in the light of a recent judgment of the Supreme Court, the question of amending section 19 of the Act to lay down clear criteria and procedure for sanction of prosecution, including the stage at which sanction can be sought, timelines within which order has to be passed, was also examined by the Central Government and it is proposed to incorporate appropriate provisions in section 19 of the Act;
(j) section 6-A of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 contains a protection of prior approval of the Central Government in respect of officers working at policy making levels in the Central Government before any inquiry or investigation is conducted against them by the Delhi Special Police Establishment. The basic principle behind the protection under section 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and section 6-A of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946, being the same, namely, protection of honest civil servants from harassment by way of investigation or prosecution for things done in bonda fide CBI Vs. M/s Vikash Metal & Power Ltd. & Ors., Judgment dated 30.11.2018 Page No. 452 of 467 performance of pubic duty, it is felt that the protection under both these provisions should be available to public servants even after they cease to be public servants or after they cease to hold sensitive policy level position, as the case may be. Accordingly, it is proposed to amend section 6-A of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 for extending the protection of prior approval of the Central Government before conducting any inquiry or investigation in respect of offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, to civil servants holding such senior policy level positions even after they cease to hold such positions due to reversion or retirement or other reasons.
3. The Bill seeks to achieve the above objectives.
(Emphasis supplied by me)
534. Thus from a bare perusal of the aforesaid objects and reasons of the Amendment Act, 2018 coupled with the various provisions so incorporated in the Principal Act, it is clear that the prime reason for introducing various amendments in the existing Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 was that no offence in the absence of existence of malafide intention on the part of public servant concerned in committing a given act or omission be made punishable. The objects and reasons further states that the amendment in the Principal Act have been necessitated on account of ratification by India of the United Nations Convention against Corruption, the international practice on treatment of the offence of bribery and corruption and judicial pronouncements. These all factors thus necessitated a review of the existing provisions of the Act. While describing the salient features of the Bill, it has been further provided in Clause 2 (c) of the statement of objects and reasons that as the proposed new definition of bribery is comprehensive enough to cover CBI Vs. M/s Vikash Metal & Power Ltd. & Ors., Judgment dated 30.11.2018 Page No. 453 of 467 all offences presently provided in Section 8, 9, 10, 11 and also the offences presently defined in clauses (a), (b) and (d) of sub-section (1) of Section 13 of the Act which covers criminal misconduct by a public servant so it is proposed to omit the said section. Thus it is clear that the Legislature never intended to do away with the earlier provisions in the Principal Act but chose to omit the same as it was of the opinion that the new provisions being brought in by the Amendment Act of 2018 comprehensively covered the earlier provisions including that of criminal misconduct as defined in Clauses
(a), (b) and (d) of sub-section (1) of Section 13 of the Act. However the only difference which has been introduced in the Principal Act by way of the Amendment Act of 2018 is the element of intention i.e. mens rea for every offence under the P.C. Act. In this regard I have no hesitation in saying that the necessity to specifically introduce the element of guilty intention i.e. mens rea for all the offences under P.C. Act primarily arose on account of certain judicial pronouncements of the higher Courts of land. By way of some such judicial pronouncements it has been held that the offence u/s 13 (1) (d) (iii) P.C. Act which read as under, does not require existence of element of mens rea on the part of public servant concerned.
"13 (1) (d) (iii) while holding office as a public servant, obtains for any person any valuable thing or pecuniary advantage without any public interest; or"
535. Further a perusal of the 69 th report of Parliamentary Standing Committee titled "The Prevention of Corruption (Amendment) Bill, 2013" as has also been relied upon by Ld. Defence Counsel in CBI Vs. M/s Vikash Metal & Power Ltd. & Ors., Judgment dated 30.11.2018 Page No. 454 of 467 support of his arguments also shows that the intention of the Legislature was primarily to make only such offences punishable under the Prevention of Corruption Act which are coupled with malafide intention on the part of public servant concerned. The said report also states that the said concern arose on account of certain judicial decisions given by the higher Courts of the land. Certainly the element of quid-pro-quo has also been introduced in the new offences which have been brought on the statute book by way of Amendment Act of 2018. However as is observed in the cases Mohar Singh (Supra) and Gunwantlal Godawat (Supra), what is required to be seen is whether in the new enactment any intention contrary to that of earlier provisions (repealed provisions) appears or not. It is not to be seen as to whether the new enactment by its new provisions has kept alive the rights and liabilities under the repealed law or not but whether the new enactment has taken away the rights and liabilities which arose under the repealed law.
536. At this stage, it would be now worthwhile to have a brief glance over Section 6 General Clauses Act, 1897 which read as under :
Section 6 General Clauses Act, 1897 read as under:
"6. Effect of repeal. - Where this Act, or any [Central Act] or Regulation made after the commencement of this Act, repeals any enactment hitherto made or hereafter to be made, then, unless a different intention appears, the repeal shall not -
(a) receive anything not in force or existing at the time at which the repeal takes effect; or
(b) affect the previous operation of any enactment so repealed or anything duly done or suffered CBI Vs. M/s Vikash Metal & Power Ltd. & Ors., Judgment dated 30.11.2018 Page No. 455 of 467 thereunder; or
(c) affect any right, privilege, obligation or liability acquired, accrued or incurred under any enactment so repealed; or
(d) affect any penalty, forfeiture or punishment incurred in respect of any offence committed against any enactment so repealed; or
(e) affect any investigation, legal proceeding or remedy in respect of any such right, privilege, obligation, liability, penalty, forfeiture or punishment as aforesaid.
and any such investigation, legal proceeding or remedy may be instituted, continued or enforced and any such penalty, forfeiture or punishment may be imposed as if the repealing Act or Regulation had not been passed."
537. Thus in view of my aforesaid discussion, it is crystal clear that the Amendment Act of 2018 in no way affect the continuation of the present proceedings or passing of final judgment in any manner. It also does not in any manner affect the conviction of any accused under the old Section 13 (1) (d) P.C. Act, if the prosecution is successful in proving the same. However it is once again reiterated that on account of amendment so brought in, the only requirement which is required to be fulfilled by the prosecution is that the element of guilty intention i.e. mens rea ought to be proved for all the offences under the P.C. Act, 1988 including qua old section 13 (1) (d) (iii) P.C. Act, 1988.
538. For the aforesaid reasons the other argument of Ld. Defence Counsel that as old Section 13 (1) (d) P.C. Act no longer exists on statute book so no punishment can be imposed by this Court also does not hold ground. Section 6 General Clauses Act, 1897 as has been discussed and reproduced above clearly takes away the very CBI Vs. M/s Vikash Metal & Power Ltd. & Ors., Judgment dated 30.11.2018 Page No. 456 of 467 ground beneath the said argument of Ld. Defence Counsel.
539. Thus it stands conclusively established that the Prevention of Corruption (Amendment) Act, 2018 does not in any manner affect the continuation of present proceedings under the old section 13 (1) (d) and more so when I have already discussed and concluded that various acts and omissions were committed by the accused public servants with malafide intention.
However for academic purposes the matter can be viewed from yet another angle also.
540. As has been repeatedly asserted by the Legislature while enacting the original law of P.C. Act right from the year 1947 onwards or while introducing various Amendment Acts that the whole emphasis has been towards preventing and curtailing acts of corruption on the part of public servants. No one can argue that this has not been the intention of the Legislature at any point of time. Thus if in the light of the aforesaid undisputed objective of introducing such a law, the argument of Ld. Defence Counsel that no legal proceedings under the repealed provisions can be continued is accepted as correct then a situation will arise where a public servant, if required to be prosecuted for any act or omission committed by him prior to 26.07.2018 i.e. the date when Amendment Act of 2018 was notified then he can be prosecuted only under the new Section 7 or Section 13 of P.C. Act as have been introduced by the Amendment Act of 2018 but not under the old section 13 (1) (d) P.C. Act. Of CBI Vs. M/s Vikash Metal & Power Ltd. & Ors., Judgment dated 30.11.2018 Page No. 457 of 467 course initiation of such a prosecution would be only when all the ingredients of the offence is prima facie attracted and all other safeguards protecting an honest public servant are taken care of. However such a situation will clearly violate the fundamental right of the person concerned as has been provided to him under Article 20 (1) of the Constitution of India which read as under:
20. Protection in respect of conviction for offences.-- (1) No person shall be convicted of any offfence except for violation of a law in force at the time of the commission of the act charged as an offence, nor be subjected to a penalty greater than that which might have been inflicted under the law in force at the time of the commission of the offence.
541. Thus we will have a situation where a public servant will have to be prosecuted for an act or omission committed by him for an offence which in fact was not in existence on the day when the alleged act or omission was committed. Certainly such a course of action is neither warranted under law nor can be the intention of the Legislature while introducing Amendment Act of 2018.
542. Alternatively if a public servant can not be prosecuted for the offences as have been provided under new sections 7 and 13 P.C. Act as have been introduced by way of Amendment Act of 2018 then as per the contention of Ld. Defence Counsel we will have a situation where on account of repealing of old Section 13 (1) (a), (b) and (d) P.C. Act, 1988 there exists no law to prosecute and punish a public servant for any act of misdemeanor committed by him. Certainly to keep the field free or to absolve all the public servants of all wrong doings which may attract criminal prosecution could not have been CBI Vs. M/s Vikash Metal & Power Ltd. & Ors., Judgment dated 30.11.2018 Page No. 458 of 467 the intention of Legislature. More over such an interpretation of law would certainly have an impact on the general administration of law and public good. As was observed in case Shree Bhagwati Steel Rolling Mills (Supra) that such an interpretation would cause great public mischief.
543. More over the new offence of criminal misconduct as has been defined u/s 13 P.C. Act provides an enhanced punishment by stating that such a public servant who commits criminal misconduct shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall be not less than four years but which may extend to ten years and shall also be liable to fine.
544. However under the old Section 13 the minimum punishment provided was only one year and maximum punishment was upto 7 years only. Thus if a public servant is prosecuted and punished under a new provision for an act or omission committed by him prior to coming into force of the Amendment Act of 2018 then he will be again subjected to a higher degree of punishment and thereby violating his fundamental right under Article 20 (1) Constitution of India. Such an interpretation will also thus lead to an absurd situation and which also could not be the intention of Legislature.
545. It was also submitted that the Legislature while bringing in the Amendment Act of 2018 did not choose to mention anything either under section 30 or under section 31 P.C. Act about applicability of Section 6 General Clauses Act, 1897 or that any action purported to CBI Vs. M/s Vikash Metal & Power Ltd. & Ors., Judgment dated 30.11.2018 Page No. 459 of 467 have been done under the repealed provisions shall not be affected or that the same shall be deemed to have been done under new P.C. Act. It was thus submitted that the intention of the Legislature was clear that any action taken or purported to have been taken under the repealed provisions will not hold ground any longer.
546. In this regard the observations made by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case Gunwantlal Godawat (Supra) are reproduced as under:
"In order to see whether the rights and liabilities under the repealed law have been put an end to by the new enactment, the proper approach is not to enquire if the new enactment has by its new provisions kept alive the rights and liabilities under the repealed law but whether it has taken away those rights and liabilities. The absence of a saving clause in a new enactment preserving the rights and liabilities under the repealed law is neither material nor decisive of the question - see State of Punjab Vs. Mohar Singh AIR 1955 SC 84 and T.S. Baliah V. CIT AIR 1969 SC 701."
547. Thus mere absence of a saving clause qua any action taken or purported to have been taken under the old section 13 (1) (d) P.C. Act is completely immaterial in ascertaining as to whether the rights and liabilities under the repealed law or the legal proceedings instituted and continued under the repealed provision have come to an end or not.
548. For all the aforesaid reasons, I am thus of the considered opinion that Prevention of Corruption (Amendment) Act 2018 does not in any manner affects the continuation of the present legal proceedings against the accused public servants or imposition of any CBI Vs. M/s Vikash Metal & Power Ltd. & Ors., Judgment dated 30.11.2018 Page No. 460 of 467 punishment upon them in case of their conviction as was provided under the old section 13 (1) (d) P.C. Act, 1988.
(O) FINAL CONCLUSION
549. Since it has been now concluded beyond shadows of all reasonable doubts that all the six accused persons i.e. A-1 M/s VMPL, A-2 Vikash Patni, A-3 Anand Mallick, A-4 H.C. Gupta, A-5 K.S. Kropha and A-6 K.C. Samria conspired together so as to procure allocation of a captive coal block i.e. Moira-Madhujore coal block in favour of A-1 M/s VMPL and that too for its existing plant at Purulia West Bengal and finally achieved the said object of the criminal conspiracy by undertaking various acts of cheating MOC, Government of India and by various acts constituting the offence of criminal misconduct as defined under P.C. Act, 1988 so I accordingly also hold them guilty of the offences u/s 120-B IPC r/w Section 420 IPC and Section 13 (1) (d) (ii)/13 (1) (d) (iii) P.C. Act, 1988 and convict them thereunder beside also convicting them for the substantive offences as already mentioned in the earlier part of the judgment.
550. In view of the detailed discussion and the conclusions drawn by me here-in-above my final conclusion as regard various offences for which charges were framed against the accused persons may be now summarized as under:
CBI Vs. M/s Vikash Metal & Power Ltd. & Ors., Judgment dated 30.11.2018 Page No. 461 of 467 CHARGES FRAMED S. Name of (I) (II) No accused Charges Common to all Charges Final Decision separately framed 1 A-1 M/s (i) 120-B IPC 420 IPC Convicted for the offence VMPL u/s 120-B IPC; 420 IPC; (ii) u/s 120-B IPC r/w Sec. 120-B IPC r/w S. 420 IPC 409/420 IPC and Section and section 13(1)(d) 13 (1) (c) and 13 (1) (d) (ii)/13(1)(d)(iii) P.C. Act, P.C. Act, 1988 1988. Acquitted for the offence u/s 120-B IPC r/w S. 409 IPC and Section 13 (1) (c) P.C. Act, 1988 2 A-2 Vikash (i) 120-B IPC 420 IPC Convicted for the offence Patni u/s 120-B IPC; S. 420 (ii) u/s 120-B IPC r/w Sec. IPC; 120-B IPC r/w S. 420 409/420 IPC and Section IPC and section 13(1)(d) 13 (1) (c) and 13 (1) (d) (ii)/13(1)(d)(iii) P.C. Act, P.C. Act, 1988 1988. Acquitted for the offence u/s 120-B IPC r/w S. 409 IPC and Section 13 (1) (c) P.C. Act, 1988 3 A-3 Anand (i)120-B IPC 420 IPC Convicted for the offence Mallick u/s 120-B IPC; S. 420 (ii) u/s 120-B IPC r/w Sec. IPC; 120-B IPC r/w S. 420 409/420 IPC and Section IPC and section 13(1)(d) 13 (1) (c) and 13 (1) (d) (ii)/13(1)(d)(iii) P.C. Act, P.C. Act, 1988 1988. Acquitted for the offence u/s 120-B IPC r/w S. 409 IPC and Section 13 (1) (c) P.C. Act, 1988 4 A-4 H.C. (i) 120-B IPC (i) Sec. Convicted for the offence Gupta 409 IPC u/s 120-B IPC; Section (ii) u/s 120-B IPC r/w Sec. 13(1)(d)(ii) and 13(1)(d) 409/420 IPC and Section (ii) 13 (1) (iii) P.C. Act, 1988; 120B
13 (1) (c) and 13 (1) (d) (c) / 13 r/w 420 IPC and section P.C. Act, 1988 (1) (d) P.C. 13(1)(d)(ii)/13(1)(d)(iii) Act, 1988 P.C. Act, 1988.
CBI Vs. M/s Vikash Metal & Power Ltd. & Ors., Judgment dated 30.11.2018 Page No. 462 of 467 Acquitted for the offences u/s 409 IPC and section 13(1)(c) P.C. Act, 1988 and also for the offence u/s 13 (1) (d) (i) P.C. Act, 1988 5 A-5 K.S. (i) 120-B IPC 13 (1) (d) Convicted for the offence Kropha P.C. Act, u/s 120-B IPC; Section (ii) u/s 120-B IPC r/w Sec. 1988 13(1)(d)(ii) and 13(1)(d) 409/420 IPC and Section (iii) P.C. Act, 1988; 120B 13 (1) (c) and 13 (1) (d) r/w 420 IPC and section P.C. Act, 1988 13(1)(d)(ii)/13(1)(d)(iii) P.C. Act, 1988. Acquitted for the offences u/s 409 IPC and section 13(1)(c) P.C. Act, 1988 and also for the offence u/s 13 (1) (d) (i) P.C. Act, 1988 6 A-6 K.C. (i) 120-B IPC 13 (1) (d) Convicted for the offence Samria P.C. Act, u/s 120-B IPC; Section (ii) u/s 120-B IPC r/w Sec. 1988 13(1)(d)(ii) and 13(1)(d) 409/420 IPC and Section (iii) P.C. Act, 1988; 120B 13 (1) (c) and 13 (1) (d) r/w 420 IPC and section P.C. Act, 1988 13(1)(d)(ii)/13(1)(d)(iii) P.C. Act, 1988. Acquitted for the offences u/s 409 IPC and section 13(1)(c) P.C. Act, 1988 and also for the offence u/s 13 (1) (d) (i) P.C. Act, 1988 (P) EPILOGUE
551. In view of the extensive discussion of the prosecution case as has been undertaken in the present judgment and especially keeping in view the nature of investigation carried out in the present case, followed by filing of closure report by CBI, I deem it appropriate that a copy of the present judgment be placed before Director, CBI for CBI Vs. M/s Vikash Metal & Power Ltd. & Ors., Judgment dated 30.11.2018 Page No. 463 of 467 information. I also intend to express my sincere concern about the nature of investigation being carried out by CBI in various coal block allocation matters and though the conclusions drawn in the final report to be submitted in any matter by CBI entirely depends upon the facts and circumstances of a given case and has to be also as per the decision of the investigating agency taken at its own level and Courts certainly can not interfere in any such conclusion being drawn by the investigating agency, but this court earnestly hopes that in future whatever conclusions are drawn by the CBI in any matter will be duly supported by logical, legal and rationale reasons.
552. I would also like to point out one other disturbing feature which came up before this Court during the course of trial of the present case. In the written submissions filed by Ld. Counsel Sh. Rahul Tyagi for A-5 K.S. Kropha and A-6 K.C. Samria, he also strongly argued that while prosecuting accused public servants, who were officers of Ministry of Coal, certain other public servants who were also members of 36th Screening Committee being the representatives of Administrative Ministries or State Governments were left out. In this regard attention of the Court was drawn to the role of Sh. U.P. Singh the then Joint Secretary, Ministry of Steel who represented Ministry of Steel in 36 th Screening Committee meeting and especially the one held on 03.07.2008. Similarly, reference was also made to the role of DW 5 Bhaskar Khulbe, who was representing State of West Bengal in the Screening Committee meeting held on 03.07.2008. Though, during the course of extensive discussion as CBI Vs. M/s Vikash Metal & Power Ltd. & Ors., Judgment dated 30.11.2018 Page No. 464 of 467 has been undertaken in the present judgment, I have already observed that the role of other officers be that of Ministry of Coal or of Ministry of Steel or of any other department may, if required can be considered in some other appropriate proceedings. However, what is being looked into in the present proceedings is the role played by the present three accused officers of Ministry of Coal i.e. A-4 H.C. Gupta, A-5 K.S. Kropha and A-6 K.C. Samria. Moreover, while it can be argued that other persons also ought to have been tried for the various acts of omission and commission undertaken by them but certainly no accused can ever claim that he alone ought not to be prosecuted if any other person is not being prosecuted.
553. Be that as it may, in the written submissions filed by Ld. Counsel Sh. Rahul Tyagi, the following facts have also been mentioned in para 16.3.
"16.3. It may also be pointed out that the Counsel for the accused has recently and reliably learnt that in the case of M/s Ramsarup Loh Udyog, a co-allocattee of present coal block, the Investigating Officers has recommended prosecution of Shri U.P. Singh and regular departmental action (RDA) against Shri Bhaskar Khulbe. Even this information was not shared with this Hon'ble Court when they were summoned as prosecution witnesses by the CBI, which would certainly have a bearing on their credibility and the undue influence CBI has over them as suspects and accused in other cases."
554. Though I am not commenting anything as to the veracity or correctness of the aforesaid averments made by Ld. Counsel for accused public servants since no such record has been placed before me but if there is any iota of truth in the said submissions then CBI Vs. M/s Vikash Metal & Power Ltd. & Ors., Judgment dated 30.11.2018 Page No. 465 of 467 the same speaks volumes about the conduct of the officers of CBI in investigating other various coal block allocation matters. The opinion expressed by various officers of CBI or the result being drawn by CBI during the course of investigation of other coal block allocation matters in which no final report has yet been filed before this Court is being shared by them with persons outside the agency. This fact gains material importance and raises eye brows especially when Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in its Order dated 08.05.2013 in the case Manohar Lal Sharma vs The Principle Secretary & Ors in W.P. (C) No. 463 of 2012, passed the following directions [In the said case Hon'ble Supreme Court of India is primarily monitoring the investigation of coal block allocation matters conducted by CBI].
"(3) The Director, CBI shall henceforth ensure that secrecy of the inquires and investigations into allocation of coal blocks is maintained and no access of any nature whatsoever in this regard is provided to any person or authority, including any Minister of the Central Cabinet, Law Officers, Advocate(s) of CBI, Director of Prosecution and officials/officers of the Central Government. We may add that this accords with what learned Attorney General and Mr. U.U. Lalit, learned senior counsel for CBI, have submitted before us having regard to the peculiarities of the case."
555. Thus, it is clear that CBI is even not paying any heed to the specific directions passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in all such matters much less keeping intact the very sanctity of the investigation being carried out by it in various coal block allocation matters. In fact the aforesaid averments in the written submissions filed by Ld. Counsel Sh. Rahul Tyagi for accused public servants tend to throw light as to the conduct of Investigating Agency in CBI Vs. M/s Vikash Metal & Power Ltd. & Ors., Judgment dated 30.11.2018 Page No. 466 of 467 investigation of various coal block allocation matters and especially to the circumstances in which closure reports are being filed in a number of coal block allocation matters including the present matter.
556. I am thus not delving any further into the said issue as sufficient food for thought for appropriate remedial measures has been provided to CBI, lest a mockery is made of the Criminal Justice Digitally signed Administration System. BHARAT by BHARAT PARASHAR PARASHAR Date: 2018.11.30 12:09:10 +0530 ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT (BHARAT PARASHAR) TODAY ON 30.11.2018 SPECIAL JUDGE, (PC ACT) CBI-07, NEW DELHI DISTRICT PATIALA HOUSE COURTS NEW DELHI CBI Vs. M/s Vikash Metal & Power Ltd. & Ors., Judgment dated 30.11.2018 Page No. 467 of 467


This is my header
Facebook
This is a link to Facebook!
Youtube
This is a link to youtube
Twitter
This is a link to twitter
Hello there, awesome person!


Toggle navigation
Koleksi Naia
Orders
Purchases
Collection
Payment
Shipping
Customers
Suppliers
Settings


|
Standard Reference Data Program |
Data Gateway |
Chemistry WebBook |
Go To: Top, References, Notes / Error Report
Data compilation copyright by the U.S. Secretary of Commerce on behalf of the U.S.A. All rights reserved.
Data compiled by: K.P. Huber and G. Herzberg
| State | Te | ωe | ωexe | ωeye | Be | αe | γe | De | βe | re | Trans. | ν00 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| C3 1 | 44756.7 | [696.27] Z | 3.0 H | 0.2983 1 | 0.0029 | (2.2E-7) | 1.8553 | C3 → b V | 31148.9 Z | |||
| missing citation | ||||||||||||
| C3 → a V | 37983.53 Z | |||||||||||
| Howell and Rochester, 1939; missing citation | ||||||||||||
| C3 ↔ X1 V | 44802.6 Z | |||||||||||
| Howell and Rochester, 1939; Patel and Abraham, 1969; missing citation | ||||||||||||
| C2 | 44310.4 | 700.9 H | 2.80 | C2 → X2 V | 43558.2 H | |||||||
| Howell and Rochester, 1939; Patel and Abraham, 1969 | ||||||||||||
| State | Te | ωe | ωexe | ωeye | Be | αe | γe | De | βe | re | Trans. | ν00 |
| A3 1 | 28706.6 | 411.1 Z | 1.67 | 0.2414 | 0.00170 | (3.3E-7) | 2.0624 | A3 → b R | (14953.8) 2 (Z) | |||
| missing citation | ||||||||||||
| A3 → a R | (21788.3) 2 (Z) | |||||||||||
| missing citation; missing citation | ||||||||||||
| A3 → X2 R | (27809.7) 2 (Z) | |||||||||||
| Howell and Rochester, 1939; missing citation | ||||||||||||
| A2 2 | 24788.4 | 420.3 Z | 1.71 | 0.2411 | 0.00165 | (3.2E-7) | 2.0636 | A2 → a R | (17874.6) 3 (Z) | |||
| missing citation | ||||||||||||
| A2 → X2 R | (23896.1) 3 (Z) | |||||||||||
| missing citation; missing citation | ||||||||||||
| State | Te | ωe | ωexe | ωeye | Be | αe | γe | De | βe | re | Trans. | ν00 |
| A1 | 22589.4 | 418.9 H | 2.64 | A1 → X1 R | 22493.7 H | |||||||
| missing citation | ||||||||||||
| A 0+ | 21407.5 | 416 H | 2.1 | [0.23853] | [3.22E-7] | [2.0747] | A → X2 R | (20513.0) 4 (Z) | ||||
| Chakravorty, Abraham, et al., 1973; missing citation | ||||||||||||
| A → X1 5 R | 21311 | |||||||||||
| Vasudev and Jones, 1976 | ||||||||||||
| b 1Σ+ | 13651.1 | 615.5 H | 2.8 | 0.2815 | 0.0025 | (2.4E-7) | 1.9098 | b → X2 | 12856.15 Z | |||
| missing citation | ||||||||||||
| b → X1 | 13653.68 Z | |||||||||||
| missing citation | ||||||||||||
| State | Te | ωe | ωexe | ωeye | Be | αe | γe | De | βe | re | Trans. | ν00 |
| a 1Δ | 6816.0 | 616.3 Z | 2.70 | 0.2806 | 0.00187 | (2.3E-7) | 1.9129 | |||||
| X2 (3Σ-) 1 | 796.3 | 612.6 H | 2.61 | 0.2805 6 | 0.0020 | (2.4E-7) | 1.9132 | |||||
| X1 (3Σ-) 0+ | 0 | [605.0] Z | 2.62 H | 0.2792 | 0.0020 | (2.3E-7) | 1.9177~ |
| 1 | Ω-type doubling Δ vef(v=0) = (+)8.9E-5J(J+1). The rotational analyses by Abraham and Patel, 1970 and Abraham and Patel, 1971 are in disagreement with Prevot, Colin, et al., 1975. |
| 2 | Extrapolations from v'-0 bands having v'≥ 2. |
| 3 | Extrapolations from v'-0 (A2 → X2) and 0-v" (A2 → a) bands having v' ≥ 1 and v" ≥ 2, respectively. |
| 4 | Extrapolated from the 0-2 band, the only rotationally analysed band. The lower-state vibrational numbering of Chakravorty, Abraham, et al., 1973 has been increased by 1 Vasudev and Jones, 1976. |
| 5 | Band heads observed, but no details given Vasudev and Jones, 1976. |
| 6 | Ω-type doubling Δ vef(v=0) = +0.00031J(J+l) Vasudev and Jones, 1976. |
Go To: Top, Constants of diatomic molecules, Notes / Error Report
Data compilation copyright by the U.S. Secretary of Commerce on behalf of the U.S.A. All rights reserved.
Howell and Rochester, 1939
Howell, H.G.; Rochester, G.D.,
The band spectrum of antimony fluoride (SbF),
Proc. Phys. Soc. London, 1939, 51, 329. [all data]
Patel and Abraham, 1969
Patel, M.M.; Abraham, K.C.,
Vibrational analysis of ultraviolet bands of SbF,
Indian J. Pure Appl. Phys., 1969, 7, 641. [all data]
Chakravorty, Abraham, et al., 1973
Chakravorty, M.; Abraham, K.C.; Patel, M.M.,
On the emission spectrum of molecular SbF,
J. Phys. B:, 1973, 6, 757. [all data]
Vasudev and Jones, 1976
Vasudev, R.; Jones, W.E.,
The near-ultraviolet and visible bands of antimony monofluoride,
J. Mol. Spectrosc., 1976, 59, 442. [all data]
Abraham and Patel, 1970
Abraham, K.C.; Patel, M.M.,
Rotational analysis of C3 system of the SbF molecule,
J. Phys. B:, 1970, 3, 1183. [all data]
Abraham and Patel, 1971
Abraham, K.C.; Patel, M.M.,
Fine structure analysis of the C1 system (λ2600-λ2700 Å) of the SbF molecule,
J. Phys. B:, 1971, 4, 1398. [all data]
Prevot, Colin, et al., 1975
Prevot, F.; Colin, R.; Jones, W.E.,
Rotational analysis of the ultraviolet bands of the antimony monofluoride molecule,
J. Mol. Spectrosc., 1975, 56, 432. [all data]
Go To: Top, Constants of diatomic molecules, References
Copyright for NIST Standard Reference Data is governed by the Standard Reference Data Act.
|
Standard Reference Data Program |
Data Gateway |
Chemistry WebBook |
If you have comments or questions about this site, please contact us.


id
received
from
isRead
subject
bodyPreview
actionMove
data
data
data
data
data
data
move to archive


Before Change
[("من", "PR"), ("به", "PREP"), ("مدرسه", "N"), ("رفته بودم", "V"), (".", "PUNC")]
_sentences = [[item.replace(" ", "_") for item in sentence] for sentence in sentences]
results = super(stanford.POSTagger, self).tag_sents(_sentences)
return [[(word, tag[1].split("/")[-1]) for word, tag in zip(sentence, result)] for sentence, result in zip(sentences, results)]
After Change
replace_spaces = lambda sentence: [word.replace(" ", "_") for word in sentence]
return super(stanford.POSTagger, self).tag_sents(map(replace_spaces, sentences))


Saskatoon financial advisor charged with fraud
by Saskatoon StarPhoenixA man who allegedly defrauded 24 victims of more than $2 million has been arrested following a joint investigation by the Saskatoon police and Saskatoon RCMP.
A man who allegedly defrauded 24 victims of more than $2 million has been arrested following a joint investigation by the Saskatoon police and Saskatoon RCMP.
Sixty-nine-year-old Vincent John Mullee was arrested Wednesday and faces charges of criminal breach of trust, fraud over $5,000 and laundering proceeds of crime.
The investigation began when the Financial and Consumer Affairs Authority began investigating Mullee and his business as a independent financial advisor in June 2018. A subsequent investigation by detectives in the SPS economic crime section and Saskatoon RCMP’s provincial general investigation section.
The investigation uncovered 24 victims of the alleged fraud — 13 of whom live within Saskatoon, with the remaining 11 living in areas within Saskatchewan and British Columbia.
Mullee made his first court appearance on Thursday morning and is scheduled to make a second appearance on Nov. 28.


Examples: * Multi-touch interaction. This example demonstrates basic multi-touch using touch events, thus it requires the browser to support the Touch Events standard. This example is used in MDN's Multi-touch interaction Guide.


|
PU2CLR Si4735 Arduino Library 2.1.4
Arduino Library for Si47XX Devices - By Ricardo Lima Caratti
|
Functions | |
| void | SI4735::setProperty (uint16_t propertyNumber, uint16_t param) |
| Sets a given SI47XX device property. | |
| void | SI4735::sendProperty (uint16_t propertyNumber, uint16_t param) |
| Sends (sets) property to the SI47XX. | |
| void | SI4735::sendCommand (uint8_t cmd, int parameter_size, const uint8_t *parameter) |
| Sends a given command to the SI47XX devices. | |
| void | SI4735::getCommandResponse (int num_of_bytes, uint8_t *response) |
| Returns with the command response. | |
| si47x_status | SI4735::getStatusResponse () |
| Gets the first byte response. | |
| int32_t | SI4735::getProperty (uint16_t propertyValue) |
| Gets a given property from the SI47XX. | |
A set of functions used to support other functions
|
inline |
Sets a given SI47XX device property.
Sets the Si47XX device with a given attribute.
You might need to use the bit operations or some bit field structure to set right the values.
Used this function instead of the sendProperty.
| propertyNumber | |
| param | pamameter value |
|
protected |
Sends (sets) property to the SI47XX.
This method is used for others to send generic properties and params to SI47XX
| propertyNumber | property number (example: RX_VOLUME) |
| parameter | property value that will be seted |
References SI4735::waitToSend().
| void SI4735::sendCommand | ( | uint8_t | cmd, |
| int | parameter_size, | ||
| const uint8_t * | parameter | ||
| ) |
Sends a given command to the SI47XX devices.
This function can be useful when you want to execute a SI47XX device command and it was not implemented by this library.
In this case you have to check the AN332-Si47XX PROGRAMMING GUIDE to know how the command works.
Also, you need to work with bit operators to compose the parameters of the command [ &(and), ˆ(xor), |(or) etc ].
| cmd | command number (see AN332-Si47XX PROGRAMMING GUIDE) |
| parameter_size | Parameter size in bytes. Tell the number of argument used by the command. |
| parameter | unsigned byte array with the arguments of the command |
References SI4735::waitToSend().
| void SI4735::getCommandResponse | ( | int | response_size, |
| uint8_t * | response | ||
| ) |
Returns with the command response.
After a command is executed by the device, you can get the result (response) of the command by calling this method.
| response_size | num of bytes returned by the command. |
| response | byte array where the response will be stored. |
References SI4735::waitToSend().
| si47x_status SI4735::getStatusResponse | ( | ) |
Gets the first byte response.
In this context status is the first response byte for any SI47XX command. See si47x_status structure.
This function can be useful to check, for example, the success or failure of a command.
| int32_t SI4735::getProperty | ( | uint16_t | propertyNumber | ) |
Gets a given property from the SI47XX.
This method is used to get a given property from SI47XX
You might need to extract set of bits information from the returned value to know the real value
| propertyNumber | property number (example: RX_VOLUME) |
References SI4735::waitToSend().


Preparation time
less than 30 mins
Cooking time
less than 10 mins
Serves
Serves 2
Dietary
Heat the oil in a heavy-based sauce pan or wok on a medium heat (Gas 3/electric 120). It is important not to fry these on too high a temperature or they risk breaking apart. To test if the oil is ready, drop in a tiny amount of the batter. If it bubbles and floats to the surface then the oil is ready.
Beat together the flour, egg, curry powder, chilli powder, milk, salt and pepper.
Mix in the sliced onions and continue to gently beat, making sure not to crush or mash the onion slices.
Next, take about a tablespoon of batter and press a cube of brie into the centre.
Using another spoon, scoop the batter off the first spoon straight into the oil. Repeat until all batter is used.
Fry until golden brown and crispy.
Drain on kitchen paper.
Season well and sprinkle with the chopped herbs.


This project was a part of the front end web development track at FreeCodeCamp. It is a Wikipedia zipline created using Wikipedia’s API. It also provides a random quote generator. This was built using HTML, CSS, JavaScript, and Ajax.


1.Out of the 16 boxes, 2 boxes have same image.
2.You can view the image just by clicking over the box once.
3.You'll have to select two boxes with the same image consecutively.
4.If you'll select the correct pair, the two images will flip.
5.In the same manner, you'll have to select all the correct pairs in minimum number of attempts.
6.2 marks will be reduced everytime you'll click on a box to flip it.


Israel is Under Attack – Howie has a Theory on The Government’s Inaction – Political Hitman [audio]
by Israel News Talk RadioHowie forwards a theory on why the Government hasn’t responded to 13 years of rocket barrages. He then talks to Alan Silver who updates on the current state of attacks.


{% if config['GOOGLE_ANALYTICS_TRACKING_ID'] %} {% endif %} {% block in_head %}{% endblock %}
{% block body %}Please log in with your finngen.fi account to view FinnGen results.


|
Aufgabe 3 - Quo vadis, Quax?
|
General algorithm Manager More...
Public Member Functions | |
| delegate void | FinishedAlgorithmEventHandler (bool foundPath, int quadcopterFlights, TimeSpan algorithmTime) |
| Finished algorithm delegate More... | |
| void | StartAlgorithm (Vector2Int quaxPos, Vector2Int cityPos) |
| Start algorithm More... | |
| void | FinishAlgorithm () |
| Finished algorithm More... | |
Events | |
| FinishedAlgorithmEventHandler | FinishedAlgorithm |
| Finished algorithm event More... | |
General algorithm Manager
|
inline |
Finished algorithm
| delegate void Algorithm.AlgorithmManager.FinishedAlgorithmEventHandler | ( | bool | foundPath, |
| int | quadcopterFlights, | ||
| TimeSpan | algorithmTime | ||
| ) |
Finished algorithm delegate
| foundPath | Was a path found or not |
| quadcopterFlights | Amount of Quadcopter flights |
| algorithmTime | Algorithm execution time |
|
inline |
Start algorithm
| quaxPos | |
| cityPos |
| FinishedAlgorithmEventHandler Algorithm.AlgorithmManager.FinishedAlgorithm |
Finished algorithm event


Perception of Spoken Discourse Meaning
Part II: Boundary
You will be listening to excerpts of speech of recorded conversations.
You will be identifying spaces between words where the speaker has paused,
however briefly.
Each page will contain an audio file and the transcript for the audio file,
where underneath the space between each word there is a checkbox.
For each of these utterances, mark the space if you feel the speaker
made a pause there.
In each utterance, you will be able to select as many as you feel apply. Listen to the
audio closely, as it can only be played twice.
There are two items in this section.


Blog Stats
Coder Stats
Overall words for each Coder:
Welcome to the blog of Michael Bishop! Checkout some of my projects or Resume. The site is currently being built and improved on almost a daily basis. You can always check out my LinkdIn profile to pass the time.
Overall words for each Coder:


NOTE: DO NOT attempt directly style radio buttons,checkboxes, or the custom select box-you'll need to use the provided spritesheet and series of custom JS ,methods to complete this challenge ... don't worry if it's not perfect-styling custom form elements can be tricky and you'll need to use your best judgement at times!
Please enter 4 characters.
checkbox
submit


Classes
The following classes are available globally.
-
A
Realm
instance (also referred to as “a Realm”) represents a Realm database.Realms can either be stored on disk (see
init(path:)
) or in memory (seeConfiguration
).Realm
instances are cached internally, and constructing equivalentRealm
objects (for example, by using the same path or identifier) produces limited overhead.If you specifically want to ensure a
Realm
instance is destroyed (for example, if you wish to open a Realm, check some property, and then possibly delete the Realm file and re-open it), place the code which uses the Realm within anautoreleasepool {}
and ensure you have no other strong references to it.See moreWarning
Realm
instances are not thread safe and cannot be shared across threads or dispatch queues. You must construct a new instance for each thread in which a Realm will be accessed. For dispatch queues, this means that you must construct a new instance in each block which is dispatched, as a queue is not guaranteed to run all of its blocks on the same thread.Declaration
Swift
public final class Realm
extension Realm: Equatable
-
LinkingObjects
is an auto-updating container type. It represents zero or more objects that are linked to its owning model object through a property relationship.LinkingObjects
can be queried with the same predicates asList<Element>
andResults<Element>
.LinkingObjects
always reflects the current state of the Realm on the current thread, including during write transactions on the current thread. The one exception to this is when usingfor...in
enumeration, which will always enumerate over the linking objects that were present when the enumeration is begun, even if some of them are deleted or modified to no longer link to the target object during the enumeration.
See moreLinkingObjects
can only be used as a property onObject
models. Properties of this type must be declared aslet
and cannot bedynamic
.Declaration
Swift
public final class LinkingObjects<Element> : LinkingObjectsBase where Element : Object
extension LinkingObjects: RealmCollection
-
List
is the container type in Realm used to define to-many relationships.Like Swift’s
Array
,List
is a generic type that is parameterized on the type it stores. This can be either anObject
subclass or one of the following types:Bool
,Int
,Int8
,Int16
,Int32
,Int64
,Float
,Double
,String
,Data
, andDate
(and their optional versions)Unlike Swift’s native collections,
List
s are reference types, and are only immutable if the Realm that manages them is opened as read-only.Lists can be filtered and sorted with the same predicates as
Results<Element>
.Properties of
See moreList
type defined onObject
subclasses must be declared aslet
and cannot bedynamic
.Declaration
Swift
public final class List<Element> : ListBase where Element : RealmCollectionValue
extension List: RealmCollection
extension List: MutableCollection
-
Object
is a class used to define Realm model objects.In Realm you define your model classes by subclassing
Object
and adding properties to be managed. You then instantiate and use your custom subclasses instead of using theObject
class directly.class Dog: Object { @objc dynamic var name: String = "" @objc dynamic var adopted: Bool = false let siblings = List<Dog>() }
Supported property types
String
,NSString
Int
Int8
,Int16
,Int32
,Int64
Float
Double
Bool
Date
,NSDate
Data
,NSData
RealmOptional<Value>
for optional numeric propertiesObject
subclasses, to model many-to-one relationshipsList<Element>
, to model many-to-many relationships
String
,NSString
,Date
,NSDate
,Data
,NSData
andObject
subclass properties can be declared as optional.Int
,Int8
,Int16
,Int32
,Int64
,Float
,Double
,Bool
, andList
properties cannot. To store an optional number, useRealmOptional<Int>
,RealmOptional<Float>
,RealmOptional<Double>
, orRealmOptional<Bool>
instead, which wraps an optional numeric value.All property types except for
List
andRealmOptional
must be declared as@objc dynamic var
.List
andRealmOptional
properties must be declared as non-dynamiclet
properties. Swiftlazy
properties are not allowed.Note that none of the restrictions listed above apply to properties that are configured to be ignored by Realm.
Querying
You can retrieve all objects of a given type from a Realm by calling the
objects(_:)
instance method.Relationships
See our Cocoa guide for more details.
See moreDeclaration
Swift
@objc(RealmSwiftObject) open class Object : RLMObjectBase, ThreadConfined, RealmCollectionValue
-
A
RealmOptional
instance represents an optional value for types that can’t be directly declared as@objc
in Swift, such asInt
,Float
,Double
, andBool
.To change the underlying value stored by a
See moreRealmOptional
instance, mutate the instance’svalue
property.Declaration
Swift
public final class RealmOptional<Value> : RLMOptionalBase where Value : RealmOptionalType
-
A type-erased
RealmCollection
.Instances of
See moreRealmCollection
forward operations to an opaque underlying collection having the sameElement
type.Declaration
Swift
public final class AnyRealmCollection<Element> : RealmCollection where Element : RealmCollectionValue
-
Results
is an auto-updating container type in Realm returned from object queries.Results
can be queried with the same predicates asList<Element>
, and you can chain queries to further filter query results.Results
always reflect the current state of the Realm on the current thread, including during write transactions on the current thread. The one exception to this is when usingfor...in
enumeration, which will always enumerate over the objects which matched the query when the enumeration is begun, even if some of them are deleted or modified to be excluded by the filter during the enumeration.Results
are lazily evaluated the first time they are accessed; they only run queries when the result of the query is requested. This means that chaining several temporaryResults
to sort and filter your data does not perform any unnecessary work processing the intermediate state.Once the results have been evaluated or a notification block has been added, the results are eagerly kept up-to-date, with the work done to keep them up-to-date done on a background thread whenever possible.
Results instances cannot be directly instantiated.
See moreDeclaration
Swift
public final class Results<Element> : NSObject, NSFastEnumeration where Element : RealmCollectionValue
extension Results: RealmCollection
-
SyncSubscription
represents a subscription to a set of objects in a synced Realm.When partial sync is enabled for a synced Realm, the only objects that the server synchronizes to the client are those that match a sync subscription registered by that client. A subscription consists of of a query (represented by a
Results
) and an optional name.Changes to the state of the subscription can be observed using
SyncSubscription.observe(_:options:_:)
.Subscriptions are created using
See moreResults.subscribe()
orResults.subscribe(named:)
.Declaration
Swift
public class SyncSubscription<T> : RealmCollectionValue where T : RealmCollectionValue
-
A permission which can be applied to a Realm, Class, or specific Object.
Permissions are applied by adding the permission to the RealmPermission singleton object, the ClassPermission object for the desired class, or to a user-defined List
See moreproperty on a specific Object instance. The meaning of each of the properties of Permission depend on what the permission is applied to, and so are left undocumented here. See RealmPrivileges
,ClassPrivileges
, andObjectPrivileges
for details about what each of the properties mean when applied to that type.Declaration
Swift
@objc(RealmSwiftPermission) public class Permission : Object
-
A Role within the permissions system.
A Role consists of a name for the role and a list of users which are members of the role. Roles are granted privileges on Realms, Classes and Objects, and in turn grant those privileges to all users which are members of the role.
A role named “everyone” is automatically created in new Realms, and all new users which connect to the Realm are automatically added to it. Any other roles you wish to use are managed as normal Realm objects.
See moreDeclaration
Swift
@objc(RealmSwiftPermissionRole) public class PermissionRole : Object
-
A representation of a sync user within the permissions system.
PermissionUser objects are created automatically for each sync user which connects to a Realm, and can also be created manually if you wish to grant permissions to a user which has not yet connected to this Realm. When creating a PermissionUser manually, you must also manually add it to the “everyone” Role.
See moreDeclaration
Swift
@objc(RealmSwiftPermissionUser) public class PermissionUser : Object
-
A singleton object which describes Realm-wide permissions.
An object of this type is automatically created in the Realm for you, and more objects cannot be created manually.
See
See moreRealmPrivileges
for the meaning of permissions applied to a Realm.Declaration
Swift
@objc(RealmSwiftRealmPermission) public class RealmPermission : Object
-
An object intended to be passed between threads containing a thread-safe reference to its thread-confined object.
To resolve a thread-safe reference on a target Realm on a different thread, pass to
Realm.resolve(_:)
.Warning
A
ThreadSafeReference
object must be resolved at most once. Failing to resolve aThreadSafeReference
will result in the source version of the Realm being pinned until the reference is deallocated.Note
Prefer short-lived
ThreadSafeReference
s as the data for the version of the source Realm will be retained until all references have been resolved or deallocated.See moreSee
Declaration
Swift
public class ThreadSafeReference<Confined> where Confined : ThreadConfined


@* * Copyright 2023 HM Revenue & Customs * * Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License"); * you may not use this file except in compliance with the License. * You may obtain a copy of the License at * * http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0 * * Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software * distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS, * WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied. * See the License for the specific language governing permissions and * limitations under the License. *@ @import config.FrontendAppConfig @import models.api._ @import models.external.upscan.UpscanDetails @import views.html.components._ @import views.html.helper.CSPNonce @import views.html.layouts.layout @this( layout: layout, button: button, formWithCSRF: FormWithCSRF, h1: h1, h2: h2 ) @(upscanDetails: UpscanDetails)(implicit request: Request[_], messages: Messages, appConfig: FrontendAppConfig) @layout(pageTitle = Some(titleNoForm(heading))) {
@h1(heading) @h2(messages("attachments.uploadingDocument.subheading")) @formWithCSRF(action = controllers.fileupload.routes.UploadingDocumentController.submit(upscanDetails.reference)) { @button(messages("attachments.uploadingDocument.status.button.text"), showSaveProgressButton = false) } } @heading = @{ upscanDetails.attachmentType match { case VAT5L => messages("attachments.uploadingDocument.heading.vat5L") case VAT51 => messages("attachments.uploadingDocument.heading.vat51") case VAT2 => messages("attachments.uploadingDocument.heading.vat2") case TaxRepresentativeAuthorisation => messages("attachments.uploadingDocument.heading.vat1tr") case LandPropertyOtherDocs => messages("attachments.uploadingDocument.heading.supportingDocuments") case Attachment1614a => messages("attachments.uploadingDocument.heading.VAT1614A") case Attachment1614h => messages("attachments.uploadingDocument.heading.VAT1614H") case _ => messages("attachments.uploadingDocument.heading") } }


Faisalabad man strangles sister to death with bare hands over 'honour' | Pakistan - Geo.tv
by IrfanullahFAISALABAD: A man strangled his sister to death with his bare hands allegedly over "honour" here in the district's Jaranwala, police sources confirmed on Friday.
According to Faisalabad police sources, the suspect — identified as Nasir — strangled his sister, Amna, to death in anger over the so-called "honour" and fled the crime scene.
Read more: Shikarpur man strangles wife to death
The body was taken into custody and sent to a local hospital for post-mortem, sources said, noting that legal action against the suspect was initiated.
Related:
Woman beaten in public over feudal lord's claim of illicit activities
Newly-wed man's brothers, in-laws gang-rape wife for three days


Dialogs
The most frequent dialogs are alert, confirm and prompt. In the case of an alert you just need to display a message to the user
and require no feedback besides user acknowledgement. Confirm dialog has similar purpose, but expects from the user a response
by accepting or declining the message. Prompt waits for user input. The w2ui library includes these dialogs for your convenience.
w2alert(msg, [title], [callBack])
The alert dialog can be called in the following way:
First argument, msg, is a message to display. Second optional argument, title, is the title for the dialog. The third optional argument,
callBack, is a call back function when dialog is closed.
w2confirm (msg, [title], [callBack])
The confirm dialog can be called in the following way:
The method takes up to three arguments w2confirm(msg, [title], [callBack]), where msg is the message to display. You can optionally supply title for the message and a call back function.
w2confirm(options)
You can optionally call w2confirm passing an object with options. This options object has following structure:
For convenience, w2confirm will return to you an object with yes() and no() methods that you can use in the following way:
w2prompt(label, [title], [callBack])
Prompts user to enter value. Instead of passing label, title, and callBack, you can call w2prompt in the following way:
w2prompt(options)
Following properties are supported:


Marrying ReactJS code with immutable data structures.
All about the Flux application architecture. What is Flux? How does it compare to MVC? How does it fit into the overall React story?
What are the best frameworks for testing React? Jest, Karma, Mocha? What are the ReactTestUtils and how can we use them?
Deep dive into ReactJS and the ReactJS Component Lifecycle by building a React component from scratch using idiomatic tools and practices.


Brush(ID)¶
base classes — bpy_struct
, ID
-
class
bpy.types.

Type: enum in [‘MIX’, ‘DARKEN’, ‘MUL’, ‘COLORBURN’, ‘LINEARBURN’, ‘LIGHTEN’, ‘SCREEN’, ‘COLORDODGE’, ‘ADD’, ‘OVERLAY’, ‘SOFTLIGHT’, ‘HARDLIGHT’, ‘VIVIDLIGHT’, ‘LINEARLIGHT’, ‘PINLIGHT’, ‘DIFFERENCE’, ‘EXCLUSION’, ‘SUB’, ‘HUE’, ‘SATURATION’, ‘COLOR’, ‘LUMINOSITY’, ‘ERASE_ALPHA’, ‘ADD_ALPHA’], default ‘MIX’
-
blur_kernel_radius
¶ Radius of kernel used for soften and sharpen in pixels
Type: int in [1, 10000], default 2
-
blur_mode
¶ Type: enum in [‘BOX’, ‘GAUSSIAN’], default ‘GAUSSIAN’
-
brush_capabilities
¶ Brush’s capabilities
Type: BrushCapabilities
, (readonly, never None)
-
clone_alpha
¶ Opacity of clone image display
Type: float in [0, 1], default 0.5
-
clone_offset
¶ Type: float array of 2 items in [-inf, inf], default (0.0, 0.0)
-
color
¶ Type: float array of 3 items in [0, 1], default (1.0, 1.0, 1.0)
-
color_type
¶ Use single color or gradient when painting
COLOR
Color, Paint with a single color.GRADIENT
Gradient, Paint with a gradient.
Type: enum in [‘COLOR’, ‘GRADIENT’], default ‘COLOR’
-
crease_pinch_factor
¶ How much the crease brush pinches
Type: float in [0, 1], default 0.5
-
cursor_color_add
¶ Color of cursor when adding
Type: float array of 4 items in [0, inf], default (1.0, 0.39, 0.39, 0.9)
-
cursor_color_subtract
¶ Color of cursor when subtracting
Type: float array of 4 items in [0, inf], default (0.39, 0.39, 1.0, 0.9)
-
cursor_overlay_alpha
¶ Type: int in [0, 100], default 33
-
curve
¶ Editable falloff curve
Type: CurveMapping
, (readonly, never None)
-
curve_preset
¶ Type: enum in [‘CUSTOM’, ‘SMOOTH’, ‘SMOOTHER’, ‘SPHERE’, ‘ROOT’, ‘SHARP’, ‘LIN’, ‘POW4’, ‘INVSQUARE’, ‘CONSTANT’], default ‘CUSTOM’
-
dash_ratio
¶ Ratio of samples in a cycle that the brush is enabled
Type: float in [0, 1], default 1.0
-
dash_samples
¶ Length of a dash cycle measured in stroke samples
Type: int in [1, 10000], default 20
-
direction
¶ ADD
Add, Add effect of brush.SUBTRACT
Subtract, Subtract effect of brush.
Type: enum in [‘ADD’, ‘SUBTRACT’], default ‘ADD’
-
elastic_deform_type
¶ Deformation type that is used in the brush
Type: enum in [‘GRAB’, ‘GRAB_BISCALE’, ‘GRAB_TRISCALE’, ‘SCALE’, ‘TWIST’], default ‘GRAB’
-
elastic_deform_volume_preservation
¶ Poisson ratio for elastic deformation. Higher values preserve volume more, but also lead to more bulging
Type: float in [0, 0.9], default 0.0
-
falloff_angle
¶ Paint most on faces pointing towards the view according to this angle
Type: float in [0, 1.5708], default 0.0
-
falloff_shape
¶ Use projected or spherical falloff
SPHERE
Sphere, Apply brush influence in a Sphere, outwards from the center.PROJECTED
Projected, Apply brush influence in a 2D circle, projected from the view.
Type: enum in [‘SPHERE’, ‘PROJECTED’], default ‘SPHERE’
-
fill_threshold
¶ Threshold above which filling is not propagated
Type: float in [0, 100], default 0.2
-
gpencil_settings
¶ Type: BrushGpencilSettings
, (readonly)
-
gpencil_tool
¶ DRAW
Draw, The brush is of type used for drawing strokes.FILL
Fill, The brush is of type used for filling areas.ERASE
Erase, The brush is used for erasing strokes.
Type: enum in [‘DRAW’, ‘FILL’, ‘ERASE’], default ‘DRAW’
-
grad_spacing
¶ Spacing before brush gradient goes full circle
Type: int in [1, 10000], default 0
-
gradient_fill_mode
¶ Type: enum in [‘LINEAR’, ‘RADIAL’], default ‘LINEAR’
-
gradient_stroke_mode
¶ Type: enum in [‘PRESSURE’, ‘SPACING_REPEAT’, ‘SPACING_CLAMP’], default ‘PRESSURE’
-
height
¶ Affectable height of brush (layer height for layer tool, i.e.)
Type: float in [0, 1], default 0.5
-
icon_filepath
¶ File path to brush icon
Type: string, default “”, (never None)
-
image_paint_capabilities
¶ Type: BrushCapabilitiesImagePaint
, (readonly, never None)
-
image_tool
¶ Type: enum in [‘DRAW’, ‘SOFTEN’, ‘SMEAR’, ‘CLONE’, ‘FILL’, ‘MASK’], default ‘DRAW’
-
invert_to_scrape_fill
¶ Use Scrape or Fill tool when inverting this brush instead of inverting its displacement direction
Type: boolean, default False
-
jitter
¶ Jitter the position of the brush while painting
Type: float in [0, 1000], default 0.0
-
jitter_absolute
¶ Jitter the position of the brush in pixels while painting
Type: int in [0, 1000000], default 0
-
jitter_unit
¶ Jitter in screen space or relative to brush size
VIEW
View, Jitterring happens in screen space, in pixels.BRUSH
Brush, Jitterring happens relative to the brush size.
Type: enum in [‘VIEW’, ‘BRUSH’], default ‘BRUSH’
-
mask_overlay_alpha
¶ Type: int in [0, 100], default 33
-
mask_stencil_dimension
¶ Dimensions of mask stencil in viewport
Type: float array of 2 items in [-inf, inf], default (0.0, 0.0)
-
mask_stencil_pos
¶ Position of mask stencil in viewport
Type: float array of 2 items in [-inf, inf], default (0.0, 0.0)
-
mask_texture_slot
¶ Type: BrushTextureSlot
, (readonly)
-
mask_tool
¶ Type: enum in [‘DRAW’, ‘SMOOTH’], default ‘DRAW’
-
multiplane_scrape_angle
¶ Angle between the planes of the crease
Type: float in [0, 160], default 0.0
-
normal_radius_factor
¶ Ratio between the brush radius and the radius that is going to be used to sample the normal
Type: float in [0, 2], default 0.5
-
normal_weight
¶ How much grab will pull vertexes out of surface during a grab
Type: float in [0, 1], default 0.0
-
paint_curve
¶ Active Paint Curve
Type: PaintCurve
-
plane_offset
¶ Adjust plane on which the brush acts towards or away from the object surface
Type: float in [-2, 2], default 0.0
-
plane_trim
¶ If a vertex is further away from offset plane than this, then it is not affected
Type: float in [0, 1], default 0.5
-
pose_ik_segments
¶ Number of segments of the inverse kinematics chain that will deform the mesh
Type: int in [1, 20], default 1
-
pose_offset
¶ Offset of the pose origin in relation to the brush radius
Type: float in [0, 2], default 0.0
-
pose_smooth_iterations
¶ Smooth iterations applied after calculating the pose factor of each vertex
Type: int in [0, 100], default 4
-
rake_factor
¶ How much grab will follow cursor rotation
Type: float in [0, 10], default 0.0
-
rate
¶ Interval between paints for Airbrush
Type: float in [0.0001, 10000], default 0.1
-
sculpt_capabilities
¶ Type: BrushCapabilitiesSculpt
, (readonly, never None)
-
sculpt_plane
¶ Type: enum in [‘AREA’, ‘VIEW’, ‘X’, ‘Y’, ‘Z’], default ‘AREA’
-
sculpt_tool
¶ Type: enum in [‘DRAW’, ‘DRAW_SHARP’, ‘CLAY’, ‘CLAY_STRIPS’, ‘LAYER’, ‘INFLATE’, ‘BLOB’, ‘CREASE’, ‘SMOOTH’, ‘FLATTEN’, ‘FILL’, ‘SCRAPE’, ‘MULTIPLANE_SCRAPE’, ‘PINCH’, ‘GRAB’, ‘ELASTIC_DEFORM’, ‘SNAKE_HOOK’, ‘THUMB’, ‘POSE’, ‘NUDGE’, ‘ROTATE’, ‘TOPOLOGY’, ‘SIMPLIFY’, ‘MASK’], default ‘DRAW’
-
secondary_color
¶ Type: float array of 3 items in [0, 1], default (0.0, 0.0, 0.0)
-
sharp_threshold
¶ Threshold below which, no sharpening is done
Type: float in [0, 100], default 0.0
-
show_multiplane_scrape_planes_preview
¶ Preview the scrape planes in the cursor during the stroke
Type: boolean, default False
-
size
¶ Radius of the brush in pixels
Type: int in [1, 5000], default 35
-
smooth_stroke_factor
¶ Higher values give a smoother stroke
Type: float in [0.5, 0.99], default 0.9
-
smooth_stroke_radius
¶ Minimum distance from last point before stroke continues
Type: int in [10, 200], default 75
-
spacing
¶ Spacing between brush daubs as a percentage of brush diameter
Type: int in [1, 1000], default 10
-
stencil_dimension
¶ Dimensions of stencil in viewport
Type: float array of 2 items in [-inf, inf], default (256.0, 256.0)
-
stencil_pos
¶ Position of stencil in viewport
Type: float array of 2 items in [-inf, inf], default (256.0, 256.0)
-
strength
¶ How powerful the effect of the brush is when applied
Type: float in [0, 10], default 1.0
-
stroke_method
¶ DOTS
Dots, Apply paint on each mouse move step.DRAG_DOT
Drag Dot, Allows a single dot to be carefully positioned.SPACE
Space, Limit brush application to the distance specified by spacing.AIRBRUSH
Airbrush, Keep applying paint effect while holding mouse (spray).ANCHORED
Anchored, Keep the brush anchored to the initial location.LINE
Line, Draw a line with dabs separated according to spacing.CURVE
Curve, Define the stroke curve with a bezier curve (dabs are separated according to spacing).
Type: enum in [‘DOTS’, ‘DRAG_DOT’, ‘SPACE’, ‘AIRBRUSH’, ‘ANCHORED’, ‘LINE’, ‘CURVE’], default ‘DOTS’
-
texture_overlay_alpha
¶ Type: int in [0, 100], default 33
-
texture_sample_bias
¶ Value added to texture samples
Type: float in [-1, 1], default 0.0
-
texture_slot
¶ Type: BrushTextureSlot
, (readonly)
-
topology_rake_factor
¶ Automatically align edges to the brush direction to generate cleaner topology and define sharp features. Best used on low-poly meshes as it has a performance impact
Type: float in [0, 1], default 0.0
-
unprojected_radius
¶ Radius of brush in Blender units
Type: float in [0.001, inf], default 0.0
-
use_accumulate
¶ Accumulate stroke daubs on top of each other
Type: boolean, default False
-
use_adaptive_space
¶ Space daubs according to surface orientation instead of screen space
Type: boolean, default False
-
use_airbrush
¶ Keep applying paint effect while holding mouse (spray)
Type: boolean, default False
-
use_alpha
¶ When this is disabled, lock alpha while painting
Type: boolean, default False
-
use_anchor
¶ Keep the brush anchored to the initial location
Type: boolean, default False
-
use_automasking_topology
¶ Affect only vertices connected to the active vertex under the brush
Type: boolean, default False
-
use_cursor_overlay
¶ Show cursor in viewport
Type: boolean, default False
-
use_cursor_overlay_override
¶ Don’t show overlay during a stroke
Type: boolean, default False
-
use_curve
¶ Define the stroke curve with a bezier curve. Dabs are separated according to spacing
Type: boolean, default False
-
use_custom_icon
¶ Set the brush icon from an image file
Type: boolean, default False
-
use_edge_to_edge
¶ Drag anchor brush from edge-to-edge
Type: boolean, default False
-
use_frontface
¶ Brush only affects vertexes that face the viewer
Type: boolean, default False
-
use_frontface_falloff
¶ Blend brush influence by how much they face the front
Type: boolean, default False
-
use_grab_active_vertex
¶ Apply the maximum grab strength to the active vertex instead of the cursor location
Type: boolean, default False
-
use_inverse_smooth_pressure
¶ Lighter pressure causes more smoothing to be applied
Type: boolean, default False
-
use_line
¶ Draw a line with dabs separated according to spacing
Type: boolean, default False
-
use_locked_size
¶ Measure brush size relative to the view or the scene
VIEW
View, Measure brush size relative to the view.SCENE
Scene, Measure brush size relative to the scene.
Type: enum in [‘VIEW’, ‘SCENE’], default ‘VIEW’
-
use_multiplane_scrape_dynamic
¶ The angle between the planes changes during the stroke to fit the surface under the cursor
Type: boolean, default False
-
use_offset_pressure
¶ Enable tablet pressure sensitivity for offset
Type: boolean, default False
-
use_original_normal
¶ When locked keep using normal of surface where stroke was initiated
Type: boolean, default False
-
use_original_plane
¶ When locked keep using the plane origin of surface where stroke was initiated
Type: boolean, default False
-
use_paint_antialiasing
¶ Smooths the edges of the strokes
Type: boolean, default True
-
use_paint_grease_pencil
¶ Use this brush in grease pencil drawing mode
Type: boolean, default False
-
use_paint_image
¶ Use this brush in texture paint mode
Type: boolean, default True
-
use_paint_sculpt
¶ Use this brush in sculpt mode
Type: boolean, default True
-
use_paint_uv_sculpt
¶ Use this brush in UV sculpt mode
Type: boolean, default False
-
use_paint_vertex
¶ Use this brush in vertex paint mode
Type: boolean, default True
-
use_paint_weight
¶ Use this brush in weight paint mode
Type: boolean, default True
-
use_persistent
¶ Sculpt on a persistent layer of the mesh
Type: boolean, default False
-
use_plane_trim
¶ Enable Plane Trim
Type: boolean, default False
-
use_pressure_jitter
¶ Enable tablet pressure sensitivity for jitter
Type: boolean, default False
-
use_pressure_masking
¶ Pen pressure makes texture influence smaller
Type: enum in [‘NONE’, ‘RAMP’, ‘CUTOFF’], default ‘NONE’
-
use_pressure_size
¶ Enable tablet pressure sensitivity for size
Type: boolean, default False
-
use_pressure_spacing
¶ Enable tablet pressure sensitivity for spacing
Type: boolean, default False
-
use_pressure_strength
¶ Enable tablet pressure sensitivity for strength
Type: boolean, default True
-
use_primary_overlay
¶ Show texture in viewport
Type: boolean, default False
-
use_primary_overlay_override
¶ Don’t show overlay during a stroke
Type: boolean, default False
-
use_restore_mesh
¶ Allow a single dot to be carefully positioned
Type: boolean, default False
-
use_scene_spacing
¶ Calculate the brush spacing using view or scene distance
VIEW
View, Calculate brush spacing relative to the view.SCENE
Scene, Calculate brush spacing relative to the scene using the stroke location.
Type: enum in [‘VIEW’, ‘SCENE’], default ‘VIEW’
-
use_secondary_overlay
¶ Show texture in viewport
Type: boolean, default False
-
use_secondary_overlay_override
¶ Don’t show overlay during a stroke
Type: boolean, default False
-
use_smooth_stroke
¶ Brush lags behind mouse and follows a smoother path
Type: boolean, default False
-
use_space
¶ Limit brush application to the distance specified by spacing
Type: boolean, default True
-
use_space_attenuation
¶ Automatically adjust strength to give consistent results for different spacings
Type: boolean, default True
-
uv_sculpt_tool
¶ GRAB
Grab, Grab UVs.RELAX
Relax, Relax UVs.PINCH
Pinch, Pinch UVs.
Type: enum in [‘GRAB’, ‘RELAX’, ‘PINCH’], default ‘GRAB’
-
vertex_paint_capabilities
¶ Type: BrushCapabilitiesVertexPaint
, (readonly, never None)
-
vertex_tool
¶ Type: enum in [‘DRAW’, ‘BLUR’, ‘AVERAGE’, ‘SMEAR’], default ‘DRAW’
-
weight
¶ Vertex weight when brush is applied
Type: float in [0, 1], default 1.0
-
weight_paint_capabilities
¶ Type: BrushCapabilitiesWeightPaint
, (readonly, never None)
-
weight_tool
¶ Type: enum in [‘DRAW’, ‘BLUR’, ‘AVERAGE’, ‘SMEAR’], default ‘DRAW’
-
classmethod
bl_rna_get_subclass
(id, default=None)¶ Parameters: id (string) – The RNA type identifier. Returns: The RNA type or default when not found. Return type: bpy.types.Struct
subclass
-
classmethod
bl_rna_get_subclass_py
(id, default=None)¶ Parameters: id (string) – The RNA type identifier. Returns: The class or default when not found. Return type: type
-
Inherited Properties
Inherited Functions
References


This car need some wheels
OWSLA‘s josh pan continues to prove himself as an unstoppable force bound by no musical limits. Establishing his initial sound in heavy-hitting bass production but quickly showcasing his shapeshifting artistry from trap to house to lofi-esque beats, pan’s latest production foray into the indie realm should come as no surprise, but still defies all expectation.
Read MoreWe’re coming to MEXICO CITY this Friday and Saturday
Follow up OWSLA's latest invasion of Mexico City. The after pop up store will stay open for only limited time. Check out our merch to find out our best offers.
Read MoreUnreleased collaboration from ekali and skrillex
Recently Ekali stopped by LA’s Shrine Expo Hall on Valentine’s Day while on his headlining A World Away tour. During his performance, Ekali thought to crowd test an unreleased Skrillex collaboration, much to fans’ excitement.
Read MoreGain access to new content, exclusive downloads, offers, and special events.
Heartland Music © 2020