Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 70 (0.95 seconds)The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
Section 293 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
The Prevention Of Food Adulteration Act, 1954
The Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985
The Food Safety And Standards Act, 2006
Article 254 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Thana Singh vs Central Bureau Of Narcotics on 23 January, 2013
In Santhosh T.A.'s case the learned Single
Judge of this Court following the dictum laid
down in Thana Singh's case found while dealing
with Sec.55(a) of the Abkari Act in a case of
seizure of spirit that there is no provision in
the Abkari Act for enabling the accused to
Crl.M.C.2719 of 2020
59
request for sending sample for chemical
analysis. It is also held that during
investigation accused has no right to ask the
court to help him to collect the evidence to
disprove the prosecution case and after the
court takes cognizance of the offence he cannot
adduce evidence before the case is posted for
defence evidence unless such a right is
conferred on him by a statute. Even if a second
sample is available, it cannot be sent for
examination at his request merely because the
report of the examination of first sample is
unfavourable to him. That would uphold the
statutory mandate of admissibility of the report
of chemical examiner under Sec.293 Cr.P.C
without formal proof. So we are of the
considered view that the law in Santhosh T.A's
case is correctly held.
Girish Kumar vs State Of Kerala on 31 October, 2007
"Petitioners/accused have no legal or
statutory right to make a request for
sending 'B' sample for chemical
analysis. The dictum laid down by this
Court to the contrary in Girish Kumar v
State of Kerala (2010 (3) KHC 171),
Joshy George v State of Kerala (2011
(4) KHC 818), Rajappan and Another v
State of Kerala (2012 (2) KHC 657),
Harikrishnan R. v State of Kerala
(2016 (4) KHC 57), Santhosh and
Another v State of Kerala (2020 (1)
Crl.M.C.2719 of 2020
84
KHC 480), Saneesh v State of Kerala
(2020 (1) KHC 289) and Vijayan v. State
of Kerala (2020 (3) KLT 602) are held
to be not good law.
Pandit Ukha Kolhe vs The State Of Maharashtra on 11 February, 1963
"A bare reading of sub-sections (1) and
(2) of S.293 shows that it is not
obligatory that an expert who furnishes
his opinion on the scientific issue of
the chemical examination of substance,
should be of necessity made to depose
in proceedings before Court. This
aspect has been highlighted by this
Court in Ukha Kolhe v. The State of
Maharashtra, AIR 1963 SC 1531 (1964 (1)
SCR 926 : 1963 (2) CriLJ 418 : 1964 Mah
LJ 246) and Bhupinder Singh v. State of
Punjab, AIR 1988 SC 1011 (1988 KHC
1010 : 1988 (3) SCC 513)".