Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 10 (0.24 seconds)Section 21 in The Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 [Entire Act]
State Of Madhya Pradesh vs Samaylal Vishwanath Chandra And Ors. on 19 January, 1994
"In view of the principles enunciated in Dwarkaprasad's case
and State Government, Madhya Pradesh v. Vishwanath
Nadhanji and others (supra) and the judgments of the Supreme
Court referred to in preceding paras, the following orders are
required to be passed:
The Amending Act, 1897
Surya Baksh Singh vs State Of U.P on 7 October, 2013
9. So far as the non-appearance of the accused persons in the appeal
preferred by the state challenging the order of their conviction after
suspension of their sentence by the Appellant Court is concerned, a recent
judgment of the Hon'ble Apex court in the case of Surya Baksh Singh
vs. State of U.P reported in, 2013(12) SCALE 492, has succinctly stated
the legal position. The situation which we are confronted with in the
CRL.L.P. No. 356/2012 Page 5 of 12
present criminal leave to appeal and in various such other leave petitions
preferred by the State is that invariably in all such state appeals the State
is not able to serve the respondent mainly because the respondent is not
found at his last address or has shifted to some new address. After an
order of acquittal is passed in favour of such an accused, whether
intentionally or unintentionally, he moves out from his residence where
he lastly resided. To deal with this malady, the legislature had introduced
Section 437A Cr.P.C. on the statute book. The provision of Section 437A
Cr.P.C. is not being strictly adhered to by Subordinate Judiciary dealing
with the criminal matters as told to us by the learned Standing Counsel,
and therefore, we feel it imperative to direct the learned Metropolitan
Magistrates and the Sessions Judges, dealing with the trial of the criminal
cases or exercising the Appellate powers, to strictly comply with the
mandate of Section 437A Cr.P.C. and also require the accused and the
surety to annexe their latest passport size photographs along with their
latest residential proof at the same time. Consequently, the final judgment
passed by the learned Magistrates or Sessions Judges shall carry an
endorsement that necessary bail bond with surety, in compliance with the
order, has been furnished by the accused along with latest passport size
CRL.L.P. No. 356/2012 Page 6 of 12
photographs and residential proof. The strict observance to the said
provision by the Magistrates and the Sessions Courts to a large extent
shall prevent unscrupulous persons from absconding to defeat the course
of justice.
Section 82 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Section 374 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Section 446 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
State Of U.P. And Another vs V. Ram Gopal Shukla on 10 April, 1981
11. The Division Bench of this Court in the case of State vs. Ram
Gopal, reported in 2006 Crl. LJ 2805, while dealing with a batch of
petitions and some of them being State appeals, was confronted with
similar issues and held as under:-
Rambachan Hardwar vs The State Of Gujarat on 4 April, 1974
The proceedings for declaring him a proclaimed offender
can be resorted to and after the same, the court can appoint an
amices Curiae to represent his interest and proceed with the
matter based on the decision of the Supreme Court in
Rambachan Hardwar v. The State of Gujarat (supra).
1