Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 3 of 3 (2.94 seconds)
Documents citing Maharashtra State Electricity Board ... vs Shriniwas Ram Savji, on 10 February, 2010

State Of Mah.Thr.Food ... vs Pankaj Arun Kalbande on 24 May, 2017

In support of his submissions he placed reliance upon the judgment of the Division Bench at the Nagpur Bench in Criminal Application No.760 of 1996 dated 4-7-1997 (Nagpur Municipal Corporation Vs Ramprasad Manchand Sharma) as well as the judgment of learned Single Judge in State of Maharashtra Vs. Ramesh Shriniwas Rao 1985(IV) of All India Prevention of Food Adulteration Journal 212. He submitted that the respondent had been rightly acquitted by the trial Court.
Bombay High Court Cites 6 - Cited by 0 - A S Chandurkar - Full Document

State Of Mah. Thr.L.Z. Taksande F.I. ... vs Shri Vilas Madhaaorao Tundulwar on 24 August, 2017

15] In case of the State of Maharashtra v. Ramesh Shriniwas Rao, reported in IV-1985 All India Prevention of Food Adulteration Journal ::: Uploaded on - 05/09/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 07/09/2017 00:33:35 ::: 8 Judg. 240817 apeal 372.03.odt 212, it is observed that Rule 16(b) is mandatory and under the said rule it is mandatory to the Food Inspector to affix the ends of paper of the container by means of gum or other adhesive and its breach goes to the root of the matter and the accused be entitled for acquittal. 16] Thus so far as the breach of mandatory provisions under Rules 14 and 16 of the Rules, 1955 and the fact that the sample was not representative, it is to be noted that the accused had given sample from sealed pack of Suraj Brand Groundnut oil which he had obtained from M/s. P.D.T. Trading Company, Maskasath, Itwari, Nagpur. Significantly, no action has been taken against the said Company. Thus, in view of the fact that there was non compliance of Rules 14 and 16(b) of the Rules, 1955, the accused is entitled for acquittal and the learned trial Judge has rightly acquitted the accused.
Bombay High Court Cites 3 - Cited by 0 - S Joshi - Full Document
1