Advanced Search Results

Kamalsingh S/O Matasingh Shiv Vs. State of Maharashtra

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Arms Act, 1959 - Sections 3, 25, 25(1B) and 39

Reported in : 2005(1)MhLj218

Act, there was no previous sanction of the District Magistrate. The provision contained in Section 39 of the Arms Act 1959 is clear wherein it is explicitly written that no prosecution shall be instituted against any person in respect

Romesh Sharma Vs. the State

Court : Delhi

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1908 - Sections 397, 401 and 465; Arms Act, 1959 - Sections 3, 25 and 39; Prevention of Corruption Act - Sections 6

Reported in : 95(2002)DLT267; 2002(61)DRJ553

dated 30th January, 1999 framing charge against the petitioner in the case FIR No. 803/98 under Section 25 Arms Act, 1959 P.S.Hauz Khas and rejecting his application for discharge.2. Briefly the allegations are: that on 20th October, 1998 police … charge-sheet was filed on 7th January, 1999 after ballistic expert report and sanction for prosecution was obtained under Section 39 of the Arms Act. Cognizance was taken on the basis of the supplementary charge-sheet, documents etc. was supplied

Mohinder Singh and anr. Vs. State of Haryana

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 392 and 397; Arms Act, 1959 - Sections 25, 27 and 39; Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 - Sections 6

Reported in : 1996VIIIAD(SC)9; 1996(2)ALD(Cri)796; 1996(4)Crimes11(SC); JT1996(8)SC519; 1996(7)SCALE95; (1996)11SCC369

both Mohinder Singh and Harjinder Singh under Section 392 read with 397 IPC, and Section 27 of the Arms Act, 1959 read with Section 6 of Terrorist & Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1985 ('TADA') for short) and another against … to be allowed for the simple reason that the prosecution did not prove that sanction as required under Section 39 thereof was accorded for prosecuting him for the above offence. 7. On the conclusions as above we dismiss

Viransingh @ Simansingh Vs. State of Maharashtra

Court : Mumbai Nagpur

Subject : Land Acquisition

the offence under Section 3 read with Section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959, overlooking the provisions of Section 39 of the Arms Act which lay down that no prosecution shall be instituted against any person in respect … Court convicted the appellant No.1 for the offence punishable under Section 3 read with Section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959 and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay fine of Rs.Five Hundred and

Radhey Shayam Vs. the State

Court : Delhi

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1898 - Sections 154

Reported in : 8(1972)DLT260

J. (1) This revision is dirceted against the charge made against the petitioner under Section 39 of the Arms Act, 1959 (No. 54 of 1959). (2) Pishori Lal Bhatia, Inspector Customs (Preventive) Central Revenue Building, raided the house of

Om Pi-akash Vs. State

Court : Delhi

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Arms Act, 1959 - Sections 39

Reported in : 1980RLR649

undertaken by the Magistrate was never sanctioned by the District Magistrate as required by section 39 of the Arms Act, 1959. (2) The pistol involved in the case was said to have been recovered by A.S I. Raghunath Singh

Mohd. Zahid Vs. the Govt. of Nct of Delhi

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Terrorist and Disruptive (Prevention) Activities Act, 1987 - Sections 5; Arms Act, 1959 - Sections 39; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1973 - Sections 340; Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860 - Sections 193, 195 and 211

Reported in : 1998IVAD(SC)615; AIR1998SC2023; 1998(2)ALD(Cri)4; 1998(2)ALT(Cri)104; 1998CriLJ2908; 1998(2)Crimes325(SC); JT1998(3)SC750; RLW1998(2)SC337; 1998(3)SCALE459; (1998)5SCC419;

the requisite sanction of the Deputy Commissioner of Police, North District, New Delhi Under Section 39 of the Arms Act, 1959.3. The appellant pleaded not guilty to the charges leveled against him; and his specific defence was that

Ajaya Mohanty and ors. Vs. State of Orissa

Court : Orissa

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Arms Act, 1959 - Sections 3, 3(1), 3(2), 3(3), 4, 5, 5(2), 6, 7, 8(1), 8(2), 9(1), 10, 11, 12, 19, 21(1), 24A, 24B, 25, 27, 39, 44, 45(1B) and 45(1C); Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 326, 354 and 482; Arms (Amendment) Act, 1983; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) - Sections 482

Reported in : 2000CriLJ785

of the Arms Act has been made punishable under Sub-Section 1(B) and 1(C) of Section 45 of the Arms Act, 1959. Section 39 mandates for obtaining of sanction of the District Magistrate for prosecution of an offence made out under Sction

NitIn Nagpal Vs. State

Court : Delhi

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) - Sections 2, 154, 161(3), 164, 167, 167(2), 170, 173, 173(1), 173(2), 173(5), 190, 190(1), 193, 204, 207, 209, 226, 227, 293, 293(4), 309, 309(2), 319, 437(1), 437(2), 437(5), 439, 439(1) and 439(2); Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 34, 120B, 186, 302, 307, 332, 353 and 393; Arms Act, 1959 - Sections 25, 27, 39, 54 and 59; Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985

Reported in : 2006(90)DRJ745

not been recorded; (2) the Central Forensic Science Laboratory Report had not been obtained/not filed; (3) sanction under Section 39 of the Arms Act, 1959 had not been obtained/not filed. Submissions were made at length with regard to … 23.6.2005 at Police Station Ashok Vihar, against the accused under Sections 302/307/393/353/186/332/34 IPC and Sections 25/27 of the Arms Act, 1959.20.9.2005: This was the 89th day after the arrest of the petitioner. On this day, it is alleged that

Santosh Kumar and Etc. Vs. State of Chhattisgarh

Court : Chhattisgarh

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860 - Sections 399 and 402; Arms Act, 1959 - Sections 25(1B), 25(1P), 25(B) and 39; Terrorists and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987

Reported in : 2006CriLJ1185

appellants Gabbar Patel, Hiralal, Lakhan and Santosh along with three others was accorded by the Collector, Janjgir--Champa under Section 39 of Arms Act vide Ex. P. 11.3. After completion of investigation, the appellants were prosecuted under Sections 399, … in default of the same, to undergo further R. I. for one month each under Section 25(1B)(b) of Arms Act, 1959.2. Briefly stated the proseution story is that Station House Officer, Police Station Champa, Ramesh Pandey P. W. 7