Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 13 (0.23 seconds)The Prevention Of Food Adulteration Act, 1954
Section 7 in The Prevention Of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 [Entire Act]
Jamshedpur Notified Area Commite vs Niranjan Paul And Ors. on 18 April, 1975
The Gujarat High Court in Harchand Gajpal v. The State (1976) 1 FAC 15. the Patna High Court in Jamshedpur Notified Area Committee v. Niranjan Paul (1976) 1 FAC 99 : 1976 Cri LJ 421, Bombay High Court in Enayat Ali Nazar Ali Bhori v. State of Maharashtra (1976) 2 FAC 61 : 1976 Cri LJ 1837 and Allahabad High Court in Hirday Narain v. State (1980) 1 FAC 436 : 1980 Cri LJ 240 have taken the same view. Undisputably Rule 18 is mandatory.
Enayat Ali Nazar Ali Bhori vs The State Of Maharashtra on 16 December, 1975
I myself sitting singly in Jaspal Singh v. Union Territory of Chandigarh Criminal Appeal No. 633 of 1972 decided on 5th of May, 1977, following Enayat Ali's case 1976 Cri LJ 1837 (Bom) (supra) took the same view.
Section 272 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 276 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 13 in The Prevention Of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 [Entire Act]
State Of Kerala Etc. Etc vs Alaserry Mohammed Etc. Etc on 10 February, 1978
In view of the observations of the Supreme Court in Alasserry Mohammad's case (supra), the view of the learned trial Magistrate cannot be upheld. In Rule 22 the last column does not contain the net weight, but provides only for the approximate weight to be sent.