Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 13 (0.26 seconds)
Rajesh Popatlal Thakkar vs Intelligence Officer, Narcotics ... on 2 December, 2003 cites

State Of Punjab vs Baldev Singh on 21 July, 1999

In view of the judgment of Supreme Court in Baldev Singh's case (Supra), those suitcases were in dicky as concluded by this Court in above mentioned paragraph. They were not on the person of appellant Mamoo. Being it so, firstly it was not necessary for the members of raiding party to inform Mamoo that he was having a right to be searched before a Magistrate or the Gazetted Officer, as indicated by Section 50 of N.D.P.S. Act. There is no fault on the part of the investigating agency in this context. This Court dismisses the submission advanced by advocates appearing for the appellants on this point.
Supreme Court of India Cites 55 - Cited by 1329 - Full Document

Jagdish Budhroji Purohit vs State Of Maharashtra on 1 September, 1998

22. Shri Nalavade and Shri Saste placed reliance on the judgment of Supreme Court in the matter of Jagdish Budhroji Purohit v. State of Maharashtra. The prosecution cannot take advantage of this judgment and observation of the Supreme Court, because in this case the Assistant Chemical Examiner or Chemical Examiner was not examined and prosecution solely relied on the certificates of Assistant Chemical Examiner. That could have been a different case that prosecution depending on the reports of Assistant Chemical Examiner. But in this case prosecution ventured to examine Assistant Chemical Examiner and brought forth on record the details of his Chemical examination in examination-in-chief, and when he was cross-examined, he by answering questions asked to him in cross-examination created number of mistakes and exposed himself to be an insufficient person with insufficient scientific knowledge.
Supreme Court of India Cites 3 - Cited by 22 - Full Document
1   2 Next