Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 42 (0.54 seconds)

Rahim vs State Of Kerala on 17 July, 2002

Hence, the decision in Rahim v. State of Kerala (2002 (3) KLT 340) is not correctly decided. As soon as the seizure is effected, further procedures to be taken are very specifically mentioned in Rules 27 and 28. The above power is in addition to the power of the court in imposing penalty under Section 20 and such offence can be taken cognizance by the court only if authorised officer as mentioned in Section 25 files a complaint and those two Crl.R.P.No.3953/2007 3 provisions are clearly independent as legislature thought it fit, if necessary to confiscate the vehicle if the vehicle is involved in illegal sand mining. Even though District Collector has got power to confiscate the vehicle, rules provide that on payment of the amount as fixed under Rule 27(3), he is bound to release the vehicle .................."
Kerala High Court Cites 18 - Cited by 5 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 Next