Andhra Pradesh Court August 2004 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Prohibition and Excise Inspector Vs. Madaparthi Srinivasulu
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-02-2004
Reported in: 2004(2)ALD(Cri)366; 2004CriLJ3813
P.S. Narayana, J.1. Heard the learned Additional Public Prosecutor.2. This Criminal Appeal is preferred as against the judgment recording acquittal in S.C. No. 55 of 1999 on the file of the Special Judge, for trial of cases under N.D.P.S. Act.3. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that the evidence of P.W. 1 is available and Ex.P. 4, the report received from the analyst stating that the samples were mixed with 'diazopam' was also made available and hence, this material is sufficient to arrive at a conclusion that the offences with which the accused had been charged with Section 22 of the N.D.P.S. Act, 1985 and Section 37 of the A.P. Excise Act, 1968 had been proved.4. This matter is comxing up for admission.5. The facts of the case, in brief, are that the respondent-accused is the President of T.C.S. Inamadugu and looking after the affairs of the T.C.S. Inamadugu, Kovur Mandal, Nellore District. It is also the case of the prosecution that on 8-1-1999 at 10.45 a.m. P.W...
P. Vasu and anr. Vs. State of A.P.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-02-2004
Reported in: I(2005)DMC753
P.S. Narayana, J.1. A1 and A3 in Sessions Case No. 462 of 1996 on the file of Sessions Judge, Adilabad, aggrieved by the conviction imposed and sentence recorded by the judgment dated 20.8.1997 had preferred the present criminal appeal.2. Mr. Venugopal, the learned Counsel representing the appellants would submit that A2, the father of A1 and husband of A3 was acquitted of the charges under Sections 498-A and 304-B, I.P.C. But, however, A1 and A3, though were acquitted of the charge under Section 304-B, , I.P.C., they were convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and also pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- in default to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of two months each for the offence under Section 498-A, I.P.C. The learned Counsel would point out that P.W. 1 is the father of the deceased, P.W. 2 is the mother of the deceased and P.W. 3 is the brother of the deceased. The learned Counsel pointed out several contradictions and would submit that the allege...
- ‹ Prev
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- Next ›