Given the provided information, it's impossible to provide a summary of a court case. The provided text only contains the title "The Police Act, 1888," the court "Union of India - Act," and the date "1 January 1888." This describes a piece of legislation, not a court case. To provide a case summary, I need the case name (e.g., State of Maharashtra v. XYZ), and ideally, a brief description of the case's subject matter.

However, I can provide a general outline of what a summary of a hypothetical case related to the Police Act, 1888 might look like, assuming such a case existed and I had the necessary information:

Hypothetical Case Summary: Case Related to the Police Act, 1888

Short Summary This hypothetical case concerns the interpretation of Section X of the Police Act, 1888, regarding the powers of police officers to regulate public assemblies. The court held that the police action was ultra vires, as it exceeded the powers granted under the Act.

Facts A religious procession was organized in [City Name]. The local police, citing Section X of the Police Act, 1888, imposed restrictions on the route and duration of the procession. The organizers challenged these restrictions, arguing they were unreasonable and violated their fundamental right to religious freedom.

Issues

1. Whether Section X of the Police Act, 1888, grants the police the power to impose the restrictions placed on the religious procession.
2. Whether the restrictions imposed by the police were reasonable and proportionate, considering the fundamental right to religious freedom.

Petitioner's Arguments The petitioners (organizers of the procession) argued that the police restrictions were excessive and not justified by any imminent threat to public order. They contended that the police misinterpreted Section X and that the restrictions violated Article 25 of the Constitution, guaranteeing freedom of religion.

Respondent's Arguments The respondent (the State/Police) argued that the restrictions were necessary to maintain public order and prevent potential clashes between different religious groups. They argued that Section X grants them broad powers to regulate public assemblies in the interest of public safety.

Court's Reasoning The court analyzed the language of Section X of the Police Act, 1888, and found that it only allows for reasonable restrictions based on a genuine apprehension of a breach of peace. The court found that the police had not presented sufficient evidence to justify the extent of the restrictions imposed. The court emphasized the importance of balancing public order with the fundamental right to religious freedom.

Conclusion The court ruled in favor of the petitioners. The restrictions imposed by the police were deemed ultra vires (beyond their powers) and were quashed. The petitioners were allowed to proceed with the procession, subject to reasonable regulations ensuring public safety, as determined by the court.