Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 3 of 3 (0.34 seconds)
Sudesh Kedia vs Union Of India on 28 January, 2025 cites

Sukhwant Singh vs State Of Punjab on 28 March, 1995

86. The Hon'ble Apex Court at the same time has also emphasized in the case of Sukhwant Singh v. State of Punjab, 1995 (3) SCC 367, that observations from a judgement of the Supreme Court should not be read in isolation and it is improper for any court to take out a sentence from the judgment of this Court divorced from the context in which they are made, for ready reference the relevant paragraph of the aforesaid judgment is being quoted as under:
Supreme Court of India Cites 15 - Cited by 105 - Full Document

R. S. Seth Gopikrishan Agarwal vs R. N. Sen, Assistant Collector on 5 January, 1967

In R.S. Seth Gopikrishan Agarwal v. R.N. Sen, Assistant Collector of Customs this Court repelled the challenge to the validity of the 50 Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 641 of 2024 search of the premises of the appellant and the seizure of the documents found therein. The search was carried out under the authority of an authorisation issued under Rule 126(L)(2) of the Defence of India (Amendment) Rules, 1963 (Gold Control Rules) for search of the premises of the appellant. The validity of the authorisation was challenged on the ground of mala fides as also on the ground that the authorisation did not expressly employ the phrase 'reason to believe' occurring in Section 105 of the Customs Act. Negativing both the contentions, Subba Rao, C.J. speaking for the Court observed that the subject underlying Section 105 of the Customs Act which confers power for issuing authorisation for search of the premises and seizure of incriminating articles was to search for goods liable to be confiscated or documents secreted in any place, which are relevant to any proceeding under the Act. The legislative policy reflected in the section is that the search must be in regard to the two categories mentioned in the section. The Court further observed that though under the section, the officer concerned need not give reasons if the existence of belief is questioned in any collateral proceedings he has to produce relevant evidence to sustain his belief. A shield against the abuse of power was found in the provision that the officer authorised to search has to send forthwith to the Collector of Customs a copy of any record made by him. Sub-section (2) of Section 37 of the Act takes care for this position inasmuch as that where an officer below the rank of the Director of Enforcement carried out the search, he must send a report to the Director of Enforcement. The last part of the submission does not commend to us because the file was produced before us and as stated earlier, the Officer issuing the search warrant had material which he rightly claimed to be adequate for forming the reasonable belief to issue the search warrant."
Supreme Court of India Cites 17 - Cited by 36 - K S Rao - Full Document
1