Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 8 of 8 (0.18 seconds)

Pramod Kumar Singh vs The State Of Uttar Pradesh on 16 March, 2021

B. Because the Trial Court failed to appreciate facts and records while passing the impugned orders filling the Cr. Rev 333/2024 Pramod Kumar Vs. State page no. 2.of 11 present revision petition filed by the revisionist for indulgence of this Hon'ble court for correcting illegality and propriety in the impugned order the revisionist. C. Because the impugned order of the Trial Court is against the principles of natural justice as per law laid down by High Court as well as Supreme Court as there is no prima facie case is made out against the present revisionist, despite that the charges were framed under section 33/38/58 of Delhi Excise Act. Because no incriminate article were recovered from the club. The recovery of two empty bottles (NPDL) as alleged, no offences provision Delhi Excise Act are not made out. As per section 33 of The Delhi Excise Act, 2009 states that penalty for unlawful, import, export, transport, manufacture, possession, sale tec The revisionist was not having any unlawful possession of those bottles and not even the revisionist was involved any kind of import, export, transport, manufacture, possession, sale etc. Therefore, the revisionist cannot be charged under section 33 of Delhi Excise Act. Possession of Empty Bottles does not constraint any offence, as the revisionist was not.
Supreme Court of India Cites 5 - Cited by 4 - U U Lalit - Full Document

State Of Uttar Pradesh And Ors vs Dr. Anupam Gupta Etc on 13 February, 1992

1. This is a revision petition u/s 397 Cr.P.C. against impugned orders dated 17.03.2023 and 17.07.2023 passed by the Court of Ld. Metropolitan Magistrate-06/South East/Saket Courts, in Criminal case No. 6149/2022 titled State Vs. Anuj Verma Etc., arising out of FIR No. 484/2019 PS Kalkaji. The revisionist is one of the 03 persons chargesheeted in the said FIR for the commission of offence punishable u/s 33/38/58 Delhi Excise Act. Vide the order dated 17.03.2023, the Ld. Magistrate was pleased to observe that a prima facie case was made out against the revisionist and other chargesheeted accused persons u/s 33/38/58 Delhi Excise Act. Vide the order dated 17.07.2023, the Ld. Magistrate was pleased to frame a formal charge against the revisionist and the others u/s 33/38/58 Delhi Excise Act.
Supreme Court of India Cites 17 - Cited by 134 - K Ramaswamy - Full Document
1