Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 6 of 6 (0.34 seconds)Section 7 in The Essential Commodities Act, 1955 [Entire Act]
Sri Chand Batra vs State Of U.P on 19 December, 1973
In Shri Chand Batra v. State of U.P. such a question was raised regarding the strength the liquor & their lordships repelled the argument on similar grounds. I stand fortified on this point by the decision of their Lordships of the Supreme Court quoted above. In the statement of the accused recorded under Section 342, Cr. P.C. in was pertinently asked of him whether the article recovered from him was urea fertilizer and was also asked whether the article sold by him was urea fertilizer. The accused made a general denial and did not raise the dispute regarding the nature of the article alleged to have been possessed by him or sold by him. P.W 5 Pannalal who is an Agriculture Extension Office in the Panchayat Samiti, Asind, is expected to know what urea fertilizer is He has stated that the six 'kattas' recovered from the house of the accused were of urea of Shriram Fertilizer. He further stated that the 'katta' of urea purchased by Balu was also seized vide seizure memo Ex P. 6. An Officer of the Panchayat Samiti, who is an Agriculture Extension Officer of the Panchayat Samiti is required to deal with the supply of fertilizer to the cultivators and is required to explain the use of fertilizer to the farmers. He can, therefore, be termed as one of the experts within the meaning of Section 45 of the Evidence Act.
Section 4 in The Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 [Entire Act]
Section 45 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
Section 14 in The Essential Commodities Act, 1955 [Entire Act]
1