Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 8 of 8 (0.25 seconds)The Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985
Section 8 in The Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 [Entire Act]
Section 20 in The Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 [Entire Act]
Section 32 in The Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 [Entire Act]
Rafiq Qureshi vs Narcotic Control Bureau Eastern Zonal ... on 7 May, 2019
This
Court in Rafiq Qureshi (supra) clarified that the language of
12
Section 32-B inherently preserves the court’s discretion to
consider other relevant factors beyond those listed.
Gurdev Singh & Anr vs State Of Punjab on 1 August, 2003
18. We may also refer to the decision of this Court in Gurdev
Singh vs. State of Punjab, reported in (2021) 6 SCC 558. In the
said case, it was held that the court should be guided by the
factors mentioned in Section 32-B of the NDPS Act and other
relevant factors while imposing a sentence higher than the
minimum. Therefore, factors mentioned in Section 32-B of the
NDPS Act are in addition to other relevant facts, and it cannot
be said that the minimum sentence under the NDPS Act is to be
considered as a maximum sentence. It was observed at page 564:
Krishna Murari Patel vs State Of U.P. And Another on 24 February, 2020
22. The views expressed by the learned Single Judges
in Krishna Murari Pal [Krishna Murari Pal v. State of
U.P., 2015 SCC OnLine All 4909] and Ram Asre [Ram
Asre v. State of U.P., 2017 SCC OnLine All 2891] cor-
rectly notice the ambit and scope of Section 32-B.
1