Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 2]

Karnataka High Court

State Of Karnataka vs Bimal Kumar Gupta on 22 August, 2016

Author: Anand Byrareddy

Bench: Anand Byrareddy

                              1




        IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT
                     BENGALURU

       DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF AUGUST 2016

                          BEFORE

     THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND BYRAREDDY

            CRIMINAL APPEAL No.341 OF 2011

BETWEEN:

State of Karnataka by
Drugs Inspector,
Bangalore III Circle,
Bangalore.
                                  ...APPELLANT
(By Shri S. Vishwamurthy, Government Pleader )

AND:

1.     Bimal Kumar Gupta,
       Managing Director,
       M/s. L.A.Grande (Private) Limited,
       G.40/2, Lawrence Road,
       Delhi,
       Resident of No.20/21,
       Shaktinagar,
       Delhi - 110 007.

2.     Smt. Swagatha Biswas,
       Manufacturing Chemist,
       M/s. L.A.Grande (Private) Limited,
       G.40/2, Lawrence Road,
                                  2




      Delhi,
      Resident of No.2/31,
      Ashok Vihar - II,
      Delhi - 110 052
                                        ...RESPONDENTS

(By Shri P.N.Hegde, Advocate for Respondent No.1 )
                             *****
      This Criminal Appeal filed under Section 378(1) and (3)
of the code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, by the State Public
Prosecutor for the State praying to grant leave to file an appeal
against the judgment dated 29.9.2010 passed by the Presiding
Officer, Fast Track Court-IX, Bangalore in Crl.A.No.351/2002
- acquitting the respondent for the offence punishable under
Section 27(d) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 and
confirm the judgment and order of conviction and sentence
dated 21.6.2002 passed by the Presiding Officer, Special Court
for Economic Offences, Bangalore in C.C.No.32/1998.

      This appeal coming on for Orders this day, the Court
delivered the following:

                          JUDGMENT

Inspite of repeated adjournments, the appellant - State has been unable to furnish the address of the respondent - accused, who have been acquitted by the lower appellate court. There is no purpose served in carrying this appeal on board in the face of the inability of the State to secure the correct address of the appellant.

3

Accordingly, the appeal stands dismissed.

Sd/-

JUDGE nv