Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 10 (0.29 seconds)The State Bank Of India Through Its ... vs Navab Khan on 28 November, 2018
However, now in
view of the latest judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court
in the case of Union of India v. Mohammad Navaj Khan as
the said question is now held to be a question of fact and
as observed in foregoing paragraphs, this Court does not
deem it appropriate to go into the details about the
observations made by Panjab and Haryana High Court.
Section 37 in The Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 [Entire Act]
Section 43 in The Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 [Entire Act]
Boota Singh vs The State Of Haryana on 16 April, 2021
9. Learned advocate Mr. Kartik Pandya relied upon the
judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Union
of India through Narcotics Control Bureau v. Mohammad
Page 6 of 11
Downloaded on : Wed Oct 19 20:01:33 IST 2022
R/CR.MA/11291/2022 ORDER DATED: 12/10/2022
Navaj and submitted that in para-28 of the said
judgment, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has considered the
judgment in case of Boota Singh (supra) relied upon by the
learned advocate for the applicant and held that whether
the compliance of procedure laid down under Section 42
of NDPS Act or not is a question of fact and by making
aforesaid submission he submitted that the case of the
present applicant in respect of non compliance about
Section 42 of the Act may not be considered at this stage
as the same is a question of fact which can be tested at
the time of trial by leading the evidence.
Section 43 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Pankaj Parasmal Parekh vs Punjab National Bank on 14 February, 2019
7. Further in support of submissions in respect of fact
that the prosecution has not followed the mandatory
provisions of Section 42. Learned advocate Mr. Aaditya
Bhatt relied upon one judgment by Panjab and Haryana
High Court dated 14.06.2022 in CRM-M-25498 of 2021 in
case of Pankaj V. State of Punjab, and more particularly,
by relying upon para-12 of the aforesaid judgment,
submitted that in case if the mandatory provisions of
Section 42 are not complied with by the prosecution in
Page 4 of 11
Downloaded on : Wed Oct 19 20:01:33 IST 2022
R/CR.MA/11291/2022 ORDER DATED: 12/10/2022
that case the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Learned advocate Mr. Bhatt also submitted that there are
no past antecedents as far as the present applicant is
concerned. By making the aforesaid submissions, he prayed
for enlarging the present applicant on bail. Except the
aforesaid submissions no other submissions were made by
learned advocate Mr. Bhatt nor any decisions were relied
upon by him.
Section 42 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Section 439 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Section 34 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
1