Himachal Pradesh Court November 1999 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.
State of H.P. Vs. Satpal Soga
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-30-1999
Reported in: 2000CriLJ3274
M.R. Verma, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 4-6-1996 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Kangra at Dharamsala, whereby the conviction of and sentence awarded to the accused by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class (II), Nurpur, under Section 16(1)(a)(1), read with Section 7(i) and Section 2(ia)(a)(c) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') has been set aside.2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that B.S. Sidhu (CW-1), Food Inspector, Chamba on 12-3-1991 purchased sample of Atta for analysis from the business premises of the respondent-accused (hereinafter referred to as 'the accused'). The sample so purchased was dealt with in accordance with law and on analysis of the sample, the Public Analyst opined that the sample did not conform to the prescribed standards. On application of the accused, one of the sample parts kept in the office of the Local Health Authority was sent to the Director, Central F...
Associated Cement Cos. Ltd. and ors. Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and ...
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-03-1999
Reported in: [2000]120STC97(HP)
D. Raju, C.J.1. These three writ petitions have been taken up for consideration in the light of the representation made for the petitioners that our decision in C.W.P. Nos. 51 and 52 of 1999 dated August 17, 1999 in Gujarat Ambuja Cement Ltd. v. Assessing Authority-cum-Assistant Excise and Taxation Commissioner reported in [2000] 118 STC 315 (H.P.) ; (1999) 14 P&H; Taxes 169 (HP) governs these cases in favour of the petitioners.2. The learned Advocate-General though could not dispute this position, yet contended that a particular submission, which was not projected and considered in the earlier decision needs submission for our consideration and this issue may also be considered before applying the earlier decision of the Division Bench of the cases on hand. Pursuing the said stand, the submission of the learned Advocate-General is that the terms and conditions contained in the statutorily prescribed form K under the provisions of the Mines and Minerals (Regulation and Development) Act...
State of H.P. Vs. Prem Singh
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-01-1999
Reported in: 2000CriLJ1249
M.R. Verma, J.1. This is an appeal against the judgment dated November 15, 1995 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kullu whereby the conviction of and sentence awarded to the accused/respondent (hereafter referred to as the 'accused') under Section 16(1-A)(i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (hereafter referred to as the 'Act') by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kullu vide his judgment dated May 26, 1995 has been set aside, by the State.2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that P.W. 1 P.L. Sharma, Food Inspector purchased a sample of 'Mirch Powder' from the business premises of the accused at Manglore and the sample so purchased was dealt with as per the rules. On analysis, the sample was found not conforming to the prescribed standard inasmuch as the month and year of manufacture and batch number were not mentioned. Address given as 'M' and 'S' Company, Delhi was not complete address. Total ash was 20-1% against the maximum prescribed limit...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›