Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 16 (0.23 seconds)Section 293 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Section 41 in The Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 [Entire Act]
Section 43 in The Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 [Entire Act]
The Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985
Section 20 in The Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 [Entire Act]
State Of Punjab vs Balbir Singh on 1 March, 1994
(12) In State of Punjab Vs. Balbir Singh (supra), the Apex Court considering the scope of Sections 41,42 and Section 43 of the Code observed that :- "AS already noted Chapter V contains the provisions from Section 41 onwards regarding the power to arrest, issue warrants and carrying out seizure etc. and the procedure to be followed. These provisions are attracted if any of the steps mentioned thereunder are to be taken when there is reason to believe that any person who is sought to be arrested and searched, has committed any offence punishable under Chapter Iv of the Act. The Magistrate or Officers especially empowered under the Act can proceed under Sections 41 and 42 on -the prior information and/or having reason to believe thereupon that an offence under the Act has been committed. We may mention here that Section 43 which deals with the power of seizure and arrest in public places is slightly different from Section 42 in certain respects. Under this provision any empowered officer under Section 42 has the power to seize, detain, search or arrest in public place or in transit if he has reason to believe that an offence punishable under Chapter Iv relating to such drug or substance has been committed and seize any document or other article which may furnish evidence of the commission of such offence and can seize any animal or conveyance or article liable to confiscation and can detain and search any person similarly. The empowered officer while acting under Section 43 need not record any reasons of his belief. This Section also does not mention anything about the empowered officer having prior information given by any person or about recording the same, as compared to Section 42."
Shankaria vs State Of Rajasthan on 26 April, 1978
(9) I may add here that the-question posed by me in this case was not raised and considered in Shankaria's case (supra) and the view taken by the learned Judge has been approved by a recent decision rendered by the Davison Bench of this court in Amarjit Singh & Another Vs. State 1995 (32) Drj (DB) : Crl.Appeal No.91/92 decided on 2.12.1994. In view of the dictum laid down by the said Divison Bench, I have no option but to hold that the report (Ex.P.W-3/B) of Shri V.S. Bisaria was tendered and admitted in evidence without objection as to its inadmissibility or mode' of proof, the appellant can't be allowed to challenge its inadmissibility in this appeal. Thus, the report (Ex.PW.3/B) clearly proves that the substance seized and produced in this case was charas.