Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 26 (0.30 seconds)
Sc No. 33A/11 Dri vs . Emmanuel Chilkezie on 24 December, 2014 cites

Karnail Singh vs State Of Haryana on 29 July, 2009

634, Karnail Singh Vs State of Haryana (2009) 85 SCC 539 and State of Karnataka Vs Dondusa Namasa Baddi (2010) 12 SCC 495 and also of various High Courts, including the judgment in case of DRI Vs Manjinder Singh, Crl. L.P. No. 310/2013 decided on 23.01.2014 by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court, can be referred on the aspect of illegality of such seizures effected in violation of the above provisions of Sections 41 and 42 of the NDPS Act.
Supreme Court of India Cites 17 - Cited by 484 - P Sathasivam - Full Document

State Of Karnataka vs Dondusa Namasa Baddi on 5 August, 2010

634, Karnail Singh Vs State of Haryana (2009) 85 SCC 539 and State of Karnataka Vs Dondusa Namasa Baddi (2010) 12 SCC 495 and also of various High Courts, including the judgment in case of DRI Vs Manjinder Singh, Crl. L.P. No. 310/2013 decided on 23.01.2014 by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court, can be referred on the aspect of illegality of such seizures effected in violation of the above provisions of Sections 41 and 42 of the NDPS Act.
Supreme Court of India Cites 6 - Cited by 31 - Full Document

Sri Ram Ram Narain Medhi vs The State Of Bombay(And Connected ... on 18 November, 1958

PW6/A dated 19.06.2008 of one of the samples drawn out of the above heroin seized from the possession of the accused Sukleshwar Basumatary and Francis L. Hmar, the purity of diacetylmorphine (heroin) in the said sample was given as 60.8 percent, whereas in the subsequent two samples drawn out of the above remaining heroin in this court, the purity of diacetylmorphine (heroin) in these samples was given to be only 0.20 percent and 0.41 percent in the report Ex. PW17/B. In view of the judgments in cases Ram Narain Vs State 2005 VI AD (Delhi) 245, Rahul Saini Vs State 2006 VII AD (Delhi) 531 and also in case of Ved Singh Vs State of Rajasthan LAWS (Raj)-2002-1-13 Crl. L.J.-2002-0-1463, which is being relied upon by Ld defence counsel, such a drastic fall in the purity of diacetylmorphine (heroin) makes the very genesis of the first sample tested vide the report Ex. PW6/A to be doubtful and the accused is entitled to be given benefit of doubt because of the same.
Supreme Court of India Cites 77 - Cited by 215 - N H Bhagwati - Full Document
1   2 3 Next