plot size and the storage capacity
sanctioned to petitioner, the Explosives Rules, 2008 Table I
obliged it to have a buffer zone of 820 mtrs ... plantation which effectively
reduced the buffer zone for the purpose of Explosive Rules, 2008.
4. Petitioner (Shri. Kokare and others
plot size and the storage capacity
sanctioned to petitioner, the Explosives Rules, 2008 Table I
obliged it to have a buffer zone of 820 mtrs ... plantation which effectively
reduced the buffer zone for the purpose of Explosive Rules, 2008.
4. Petitioner (Shri. Kokare and others
plot size and the storage capacity
sanctioned to petitioner, the Explosives Rules, 2008 Table I
obliged it to have a buffer zone of 820 mtrs ... plantation which effectively
reduced the buffer zone for the purpose of Explosive Rules, 2008.
4. Petitioner (Shri. Kokare and others
explosion.
::: Uploaded on - 10/01/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 26/04/2020 04:58:30 :::
( 25 ) cri apeal 460.15
Had there been a stove explosion, there ... explosion. The stove was, as per the spot panchanama,
neatly kept near the wall. Therefore, the possibility of stove explosion is
completely ruled out. Having
explosive substance was quite high. No sufficient precautions were
taken while transporting them. The explosives were transported in
violation of rules. Therefore, Ld. APP opposed ... Hatkangale, District
Kolhapur. He used to stock his explosives within the limits prescribed
under the rules. He has requisite licence. He has a van which
CORAM : MANISH PITALE, J.
DATED : JANUARY 14, 2019.
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally
with the consent of the learned counsel ... Section 6-F
of the Explosives Act, 1884, read with Rule 121 of the Rules
framed thereunder. It is the contention of the learned counsel
cancelled basically on the ground that Authorities
functioning under Explosives Act, 1884 and 2008 Rules have not
given necessary clearance. The effort of petitioner
cancelled basically on the ground that Authorities
functioning under Explosives Act, 1884 and 2008 Rules have not
given necessary clearance. The effort of petitioner
cancelled basically on the ground that Authorities
functioning under Explosives Act, 1884 and 2008 Rules have not
given necessary clearance. The effort of petitioner
cancelled basically on the ground that Authorities
functioning under Explosives Act, 1884 and 2008 Rules have not
given necessary clearance. The effort of petitioner
