Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 10 (1.30 seconds)
Documents citing Kamal Thakur vs State (Delhi Admn.) on 10 November, 1994

State vs Masoom Ali on 18 February, 2014

21. However, even these submissions of Ld are found to be without any merits as both the above IOs being officials of the rank of a Sub-Inspector were certainly the officers empowered to act in view of the provisions of Section 42 and of Section 43 of the NDPS Act, which is actually attracted in this case as the seizure of the above contraband substance was effected at a public place. Reference in this regard can be made to the notification no. F.(76)/85-Fin.(G) issued by the Administrator of the U.T. of Delhi vide which all the officials of the Delhi Police above the rank of a constable were authorized to act U/s 42 of the NDPS Act, as discussed in the judgment of Kamal Thakur Vs. The State (Delhi Admn.) 1995 JCC 76, of which the court can always take a judicial notice. Moreover, it is also not the case of the prosecution that any such authorization or permission to arrest from the SHO was taken by the above IOs and it was apparently for the reasons that the same was not required.
Delhi District Court Cites 14 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Vinod Sharma vs The State (N.C.T Of Delhi) on 4 March, 2016

13. As regards the doubts raised by learned counsel for the appellant regarding competency of ASI Bijender Singh who seized the contraband substance on the ground Crl. Appeal No.457/2012 Page 8 of 12 that a police officer below the rank of a sub Inspector is not competent to exercise the powers under NDPS Act, the same is devoid of merit. The matter came up for consideration before this Court in Kamal Thakur vs. The State (Delhi Administration) 1995 JCC 76. In that case, the investigation was completed by a Head Constable of Delhi Police regarding recovery of 5 Kg and 500 gms of Charas from the possession of the accused. The question for consideration, therefore, was whether Head Constable of Delhi police is an officer superior in rank to a Constable as Section 42 of the Act authorizes officers superior in rank to a peon, sepoy or constables of different departments, as referred in the Section to enter, seize, search and arrest without warrant or authorization. A single Judge of this Court referred to the following notification issued by the State Government:
Delhi High Court Cites 20 - Cited by 4 - S Gupta - Full Document

Santosh Chaudhary vs State on 25 September, 2025

7. Placing reliance on the decision in the case of Kamal Thakur Vs. State 1995 Criminal Law Journal 980, it has been submitted that Section 42 of the Act authorises the Officer superior in rank to a Peon, Sipoy or Constable of the relevant departments empowered by general or special order of the Central or State Government to enter, search, BAIL APPLN. 2999/2024 Page 3 of 12 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:VAISHALI PRUTHI Signing Date:25.09.2025 17:34:45 seize and arrest without warrant or authorisation, and therefore in the present case, SI Narender Singh was duly empowered to conduct raid and effect the recovery.
Delhi High Court Cites 16 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1