Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 16 (0.63 seconds)Section 2 in The Arms Act, 1959 [Entire Act]
The Arms Act, 1959
State Of Andhra Pradesh vs Golconda Linga Swamy And Anr on 27 July, 2004
[See State of A.P. v. Golconda Linga Swamy (2004) 6 SCC
522]
Section 482 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Sonam Chaudhary vs The State (Govt Of Nct Delhi) on 6 January, 2016
Arvinder Singh v. State Crl.M.C. 3576/2011; Jaswinder
Singh v. State Govt. of NCT of Delhi Crl.M.C. 4207/2014
and Sonam Chaudhary v. The State (Govt. of NCT
Delhi) Crl.M.C.471/2015.
Gunwantlal vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 3 May, 1972
"For prosecution under the Arms Act, it needs to be proved that
the accused had the knowledge or consciousness of possession.
"Possession", for the purposes of prosecution must mean
possession with the requisite mental element, i.e. conscious
possession and not mere custody without awareness (refer
to Gunwantlal v. The State of Madhya Pradesh, (1972) 2 SCC
194 : AIR 1972 SC 1756; Sanjay Dutt v. State through CBI,
Bombay (II), (1994) 5 SCC 410)."
Article 226 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Sanjay Dutt vs State Of Maharashtra Tr.Cbi,Bombay on 21 March, 2013
"For prosecution under the Arms Act, it needs to be proved that
the accused had the knowledge or consciousness of possession.
"Possession", for the purposes of prosecution must mean
possession with the requisite mental element, i.e. conscious
possession and not mere custody without awareness (refer
to Gunwantlal v. The State of Madhya Pradesh, (1972) 2 SCC
194 : AIR 1972 SC 1756; Sanjay Dutt v. State through CBI,
Bombay (II), (1994) 5 SCC 410)."