Advanced Search Results
Natibabu Khadka Vs. State of Goa, as Represented by the Anti Narcotic ...
Mumbai
Jul-13-1995
Narcotics
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 - Sections 20 and 54; Evidence Act, 1872 - Sections 27; Opium Act, 1878 - Sections 10
1996(5)BomCR76
not necessary for the prosecution to establish conscious possession. This was a case under section 10 of the Opium Act, 1878. In our opinion the language of sections 9 and 10 of the Opium Act, 1878 is somewhat different
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskKalekhan Vs. State of M.P.
Madhya Pradesh
Aug-31-1989
Criminal
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 - Sections 8, 9, 10, 18, 25 and 35; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1974 - Sections 154, 313, 313(1) and 313(3); Evidence Act - Sections 8; Forward Contracts (Regulation) Act, 1952 - Sections 21 and 22, 22A, 22A(1) and 22B; ;Opium Act, 1878 - Sections 10
1990CriLJ1119
2309: (1973 Cri LJ 1537) had occasion to deal with the presumption arrising Under Section 10 of the Opium Act 1878, discussing the case law on the point the Supreme Court observed as follows (para 17):'In other words, when
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskKailash Chandra Sahu Vs. Republic of India
Supreme Court of India
Aug-08-1985
Criminal
Opium Act, 1878 - Sections 10
AIR1985SC1672; 61(1986)CLT71(SC); 1985CriLJ1860; 1985(2)Crimes530(SC); 1985(2)SCALE355; (1985)3SCC708; 1985(17)LC892(SC)
of law argued before us. Before going to this authority, we might refer to Section 10 of the Opium Act, 1878 (for short, referred to as the 'Act') which raises a presumption that where unauthorised possession of opium is
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask18-section briefs on any result in this list
Arun Kambli Vs. State of Goa as Represented by Officer-in-charge
Mumbai
Sep-18-1999
CriminalNarcotics
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 - Sections 8, 20, 27 and 54; Evidence Act, 1872 - Sections 114 and 144; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1973 - Sections 313, 315, 428 and 464; Opium Act, 1878 - Sections 5, 8, 9 and 10; Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 - Sections 4(1); Arms Act, 1959 - Sections 29; Bombay Prohibition Act, 1949 - Sections 66(1); Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1898 - Sections 342
2000(5)BomCR654; 2000BomCR(Cri)654; 2000(1)MhLj780
came up for construction before the Apex Court with reference to section 9(a) and section 10 of the Opium Act, 1878 in Inder Sain v. State of Punjab, : 1973CriLJ1537 . Sections 9 and 10 of the Opium Act
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskJaggi @ Jagdish S/O Ramprasad Vs. State of M.P.
Madhya Pradesh
Jul-12-1996
Criminal
Opium Act, 1878 - Sections 9 and 10
1997(2)MPLJ433
was having the knowledge of such secret chamber and the opium which was stored in it.6. Section 9, Opium Act, 1878 requires the prosecution to prove the possession of opium against accused in a trial. Even presumption which has … the possession of opium against accused in a trial. Even presumption which has been indicated by provisions of Section 10 cannot help the prosecution so far as present case is concerned because that presumption is in respect of
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskAmreek Singh and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Rajasthan
Nov-30-1989
Criminal
Opium Act, 1878 - Sections 9 and 10; Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 120B; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) - Sections 313
1992CriLJ2914; 1989(2)WLN331
affirmed the conviction of each of the accused-petitioners under Section 120B, IPC read with Section 9 of the Opium Act, 1878 (for short, the Act), but reduced the sentence of each of the accused-petitioners to two years rigorous imprisonment … animus for offence Under Section 9 can be inferred from the facts of a particular case. Further, under Section 10 when the prosecution has shown by evidence that the accused has dealt with opium or has physical custody
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskMohammad Akhtar and ors. Vs. State of M.P.
Madhya Pradesh
May-14-1999
Criminal
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 - Sections 20, 35 and 35(1); Opium Act, 1878 - Sections 9 and 10; Evidence Act - Sections 106; Motor Vehicles Act
1999CriLJ3779
of Punjab AIR 1973 SC 2309: (1973 Cri LJ 1537) the Supreme Court interpreted Section 10 of the Opium Act, 1878 which was as under :-10. In prosecutions under Section 9, it shall be presumed, until the contrary is
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskOrganon (India) Ltd. (Now Known as Infar (India) Ltd. and Another Vs. ...
Supreme Court of India
Jul-22-1994
CriminalNarcotics
Dangerous Drugs Act, 1930 - Sections 5 and 7; Opium Act, 1878 - Sections 2, 3, 4 and 5; Constitution of India - Articles 141, 245, 301, 303, 305 and 372; Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 - Sections 34, 59 and 82; Sea Customs Act, 1878 - Sections 3A; Dangerous Drugs (Import, Export and Transshipment) Rules, 1957 - Rules 2(2), 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 and 17; Government of India Act, 1935 - Sections 292; Essential Supplies (Temporary Powers) Act, 1946 - Sections 3(1); M.P. Poppy Husk Rules, 1959 - Rules 3A, 5, 6 and 8; Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 - Sections 5; Mines & Minerals (Regulations and Development) Act, 1957 - Sections 2
AIR1994SC2489; JT1994(4)SC438; 1994(3)SCALE421; 1995Supp(1)SCC53; [1994]Supp2SCR50
ORDERB.P. Jeevan Reddy, J.1. In these appeals, validity of Section 5 of the Opium Act, 1878 and of certain Rules made thereunder by the Madhya Pradesh Government is called in question. Though the Opium … B.V. Kloosterstreat 6 oss Holland (hereinafter referred to as the 'Dutch buyer') for supplying to the Dutch buyer 1000 metric tonnes of poppy husks. This contract was entered into in pursuance of 'certificate of official approval of
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Askinder SaIn Vs. State of Punjab
Supreme Court of India
May-04-1973
Criminal
Opium Act, 1878 - Sections 9 and 10
AIR1973SC2309; 1973CriLJ1537; (1973)2SCC372; [1974]1SCR215; 1973(5)LC694(SC)
extent indicated but dismissed in all other respects. Criminal - mens rea - Sections 9 and 10 of Opium Act, 1878 - appeal against conviction for possessing opium a contraband substance under Act - whether prosecution required to prove … the burden to prove that he was not in conscious possession is upon the accused by virtue of Section 10 of the Act. That section seems to proceed on the assumption, if it is proved that the accused
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskIndian Bank Vs. Ernakulam District H.G.M.T. Co-op. Society Ltd.
Kerala
Dec-23-2005
Banking
Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 - Sections 2, 3, 17, 18, 19, 31, 31(1), 31(2), 71 and 90; Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969 - Sections 69 and 100; Opium Act, 1878 - Sections 11; Representation of the People Act, 1951 - Sections 81, 82, 86(1), and 117; Bengal Tenancy Act, 1885 - Sections 114(1) and 114(3); Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) - Order 7, Rule 10; Kerala Education Rules - Rule 62; Kerala Service Rules - Rule 60; Kerala Co-operative Societies Rules; Constitution of India - Articles 14, 226 and 227
AIR2006Ker154; III(2007)BC7; [2006]131CompCas232(Ker); 2006(1)KLT479
State of Madhya Pradesh v. Azad Bharat Finance Co. and Anr. : 1967CriLJ285 interpreting Section 11 of the Opium Act, 1878 (as applicable to M.P.), Supreme Court referred to Tirath Singh's case (supra) and stated as follows:According to Mr. … alone had the jurisdiction to adjudicate and resolve the dispute between the petitioner and the first respondent. Section 100 of the Societies Act says that no civil or revenue court shall have jurisdiction in respect of any
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskAI Brief (18 sections) + Semantic Search - 7 days free
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »