Nanalal Harishanker vs State Of Gujarat on 3 August, 1967
In the case of State v. Gulam Meer, AIR 1956 Madh Bha 141, a Full Bench of Madhya Bharat High Court has observed as under:--
Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 4 of 4 (0.24 seconds)Documents citing
State vs Gulam Meer on 20 November, 1955
Meer Singh vs State on 1 September, 2009
On search, besides the declared goods, 71 bags of Poppy husks were found in the truck which were seized. The truck driver Meer Singh was arrested, Site map was prepared and the case was registered at Police Station Surajgarh District Jhunjhunu under section 8/15 NDPS Act vide FIR No. 120 of 1999. After completion of investigation, the police filed challan against the appellant under section 8/ 15 NDPS Act, in the court of Sessions Judge, Jhunjhunu. The case was registered as Sessions Case No. 168 of 1999 State vs. Meer Singh in the court of Special Judge NDPS Cases Jhunjhunu. The Special Judge charged the accused under section 8/15 of the NDPS Act. The accused denied the charge and claimed to be tried. The prosecution examined 15 witnesses in support of its cas. The accused appellant was examined under section 313 Cr.P.C. The appellant in his statement stated that he did not know about the truck. He was not the driver of the said truck. He also stated that he was not with the truck, but was called lateron. He was arrested after calling him from his house. After completion of trial, the Special Judge convicted and sentenced the accused appellant vide his judgment dated September 20, 2003 as mentioned above.
Muman Hasanali Mohmadali vs State Of Gujarat And Anr. on 26 March, 1970
4. Now the offence under Section 279 is obviously a distinct offence much though it may be a minor offence in relation to the offences under Ss. 337, 338 or 304A of the Indian Penal Code. The mere fact that it happens to be a minor offence, it does not cease to be one having independent character, and it is for this reason that while he may well be convicted for the same, the Court has to take into account Section 71 of the Indian Penal Code while passing sentence for the same. Section 71 of the Indian Penal Code is obviously intended for such purposes so that if he is also found guilty for a greater offence, he cannot be given separate sentence for a minor one covered therein. All that is required is that the offence for which he is sentenced is committed in the same transaction. This view of mine finds support from the decision in the case of State v. Gulam Meer, AIR 1956 Madh Bha 141 (FB), where the Full Bench of that High Court held as under:-
Chitoolal Ramswaroop Rathore vs State Of Madhya Pradesh on 16 November, 1990
240 the Full Bench decision in State v. Gulam Meer, AIR 1956 MB 141 has been referred to and deferring from the view therein taken it has been held that Section 71 of the Indian Penal Code would have no application and sentence can be imposed in respect of offence under Section 279 as also under Section 338 of the Indian Penal Code.
1