Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 4 of 4 (0.21 seconds)Dalsukhji Varvaji vs State Of Gujarat on 1 February, 1967
Construing the said rule along with Rule 5, the Gujarat High Court has in the case of Dalsukhji Varvaji v. State of Gujarat, supra held that the prosecution solely relying on the report of the Chemical Analyser for blood concentration will not be entitled to the benefit of the presumption under section 66(2) of the Bombay Prohibition Act and such a presumption cannot, in the circumstances, be drawn against the accused.
Section 85 in The Maharashtra Prohibition Act [Entire Act]
Malahavarao Bhagwandas Kharade vs The State Of Gujarat on 8 February, 1971
In the subsequent ruling of the Gujarat High Court in Malahavarao v. State of Gujarat, supra it was held that Rule 4 in question was mandatory and must be scrupulously followed and breach thereof would result in making the Chemical Analyser's certificate invalid and inadmissible. Applying the ratio of the aforesaid rulings to this case, what do we find ? Going through the evidence of the Medical Officer P.W. No. 1 Dr. Hargovind Kunjuram, I find that all that he states qua Rule 4 aforesaid is as follows :---
1