Gujarat Court February 1967 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.
Patel Hargovan Nathubhai and anr. Vs. the State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Feb-02-1967
Reported in: 1968CriLJ1275; (1968)GLR314; AIR 1968 Guj 250
ORDERN.G. Shelat, J.* * * * *6. That takes me to the other Revision Application No. 299 of 1966 before this Court. Mr. Patel's contention is that while the police held the power to seize such utensils in which the prohibited food-stuffs etc., were found at the time when the raid was carried out under Section 6 of the Gujarat Guests Control Order, while passing an order of confiscation of the property under Section 7 of the Act, it has necessarily to confine itself to that provision, and as provided in Section 7(1)(b) of the Act all that could be forfeited to Government would be the 'property in respect of which the Order has been contravened or such part thereof to the Court may deem tit'. According, to him, the contravention is in respect of having prepared and distributed food to more than 25 persons at a time as contemplated under the provisions of this Order, and, therefore, only that property viz., the prohibited food-stuffs can be confiscated. Rest of the property such as the ute...
Dalsukhji Varvaji Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Feb-01-1967
Reported in: 1969CriLJ695; (1969)GLR553
N.G. Shelat, J.* * * * *4. Mr. Thakore, the learned advocate for the appellant, has raised two points: The first point relates to the order of conviction passed against the appellant in respect of an offence under Section 66(1)(b) of the Act. According to him apart from the main procedure having not been followed by Dr. Talati as required under the Rules before sending the phial containing blood of the accused to the Chemical Analyser at Junagadh, he drew pointed attention to one breach said to have been committed in respect of Rule 4 of the Bombay Prohibition (Medical Examination and Blood Test) Rules, 1959. The latter part of Rule 4 provides that the phial containing the blood of the accused shall be labelled and its cap sealed by means of sealing-wax with the official seal or the monogram of the registered medical practitioner and then as provided in Sub-rule (2) of Rule 4 of the Rules, the same blood collected in the phial in the manner stated in Sub-rule (1) shall be forwarded for...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›