Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 11 (0.40 seconds)Section 457 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Adhikshak Rashtriya Chambal Abhyaran vs Narottam Singh on 4 September, 2014
27. It is made clear that once the confiscation
proceedings are initiated, the possession, delivery, disposal
or distribution of the property cannot be made, in view of
the law laid down in Adhikshak Rashtriya Chambal
Abhyaran Vs. Narottam Singh (supra).
Section 4 in The Mines And Minerals (Development And Regulation) Act, 1957 [Entire Act]
Tara Kanwar & Anr vs State Of Raj. & Ors on 19 May, 2012
Aforesaid DB judgement in Laxman has been duly noted and
discussed in the later SB judgment in Kishore Singh, supra, by the
learned Single Judge.
Sunderbha1 Ambalal Desai vs State Of Gujarat on 1 October, 2002
"25. This Court, on a careful examination of the
precedent laws in an intricate manner, finds that the
precedent laws of Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai & Ors. Vs.
State of Gujarat (supra) and Adhikshak Rashtriya
Chambal Abhyaran Vs. Narottam Singh (supra), as laid
down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, shall govern the
field, and thus, the vehicles seized under the mining law
and the forest law, shall be released, upon charging the
compensation/compounding fee or without charging the
compensation/compounding fee, only and only, if the
confiscation proceedings in regard thereto have not been
initiated by the State authorities. It is to be noted that both
mining and the forest laws have the provisions for
confiscation proceedings.
The Indian Penal Code, 1860
Laxman Lal(Dead)Through Lrs. & Anr vs State Of Rajasthan & Ors on 1 March, 2013
9. Reference may also be had to the views expressed by a
Division Bench of this Court in judgment rendered in Laxman Vs.
State of Rajasthan : (2018) 0 Supreme (Raj.) 420, wherein
Mohammad Rafiq, J. (as His Lordship then was in this Court),
author of the judgment opined on behalf of Division Bench as
under :-