Court : Jammu and Kashmir
Reported in : 2007(3)JKJ450
Bashir A. Kirmani, J.1. The petitioner-vigilance organization is aggrieved of an order passed by Special Judge Anti-Corruption, as the 'Special Court' under Section 8(C) of the amended 'Prevention of Corruption Act' whereunder while dis-agreeing with confirmation order of 'Designated Authority' regarding attachment of respondent's house he quashed the same, releasing the attached house. The matter arises with following circumstantial back-drop.2. Ghulam Rasool Magray, the respondent was booked by VOK under FIR 40/2003 Under Section 409, 467 and 120B RPC for having defrauded government while working in Food and Supplies Department at Wardwan Tehsil Kishtwar, by wrongly enhancing the number of people entitled to rations by around twenty two thousand and thereby wrongly procuring thousands of quintals of excessive grains from 1997 to 2002 causing a loss of around 9 corer rupees to State exchequer to his benefit along with others involved. Investigation in the matter was complete, when ame...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : 2002CriLJ3368
Jawahar Lal Gupta, J.1. The petitioner was a member of the Indian Police Service. He is now a Member of Parliament. He questions the constitutional validity of the Prevention of Terrorism Act, 2002.2. What is the petitioner's case? He alleges that 'its draconian provisions infringe the basic rights of people of India i.e. right to life and liberty as enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution....' Under Section 3(5), a 'person who is a member of a terrorist organization...can be arrested and punished...with life imprisonment and a fine up to Rs. ten lacs.' Section 49(5) of the Act provides that the provisions of Section 438, Cr.P.C. are not available for those 'to whom the Act applies.' Section 49(7) denies bail to person arrested under the provisions of the Act unless 'the Special Judge comes to the conclusion that the accused has not committed the crime...;.' The 'benevolent provisions of Section 167 of Cr.P.C. that a person can be granted bail if a challan is not presented within 6...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
1. Rakesh Kumar, J. The sole petitioner, while invoking inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure , has prayed for quashing of the order dated 25.2.1999 passed by the learned 9th Additional Sessions Judge, Arrah in Sessions Trial No.349 of 1994, arising out of Arrah Nawada P.S. Case No.75 of 1994. By the said order, the learned Addl.Sessions Judge has refused to add charges under Sections 3,4 and 5 of the Explosive Substances Act,1908.2. Short fact of the case is that on the basis of fardbeyan of this petitioner, a case vide Arrah Nawada P.S. Case No.75 of 1994 was registered on 8.5.1994 for the offences punishable under Sections 452,324,307 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of the Explosive Substance Act. In the F.I.R., the petitioner alleged that on 8.5.1994 in the morning at about 8.00 A.M. unknown accused persons entered into the house of the petitioner and exploded bomb and three persons of the informant side were assaulted...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : JT2003(4)SC294; RLW2003(3)SC424; 2003(4)SCALE402; (2003)9SCC673; 2003(2)LC993(SC)
Santosh Hegde, J.1. All these appeals arise out of a common judgment of the Designate Judge at Ajmer, Rajasthan, made in TADA Special Case No. 8 of 1992. In the said case, the appellants herein along with some other accused were charged by the Deputy Superintendent of Police, CBI/SIC.II, New Delhi for offences under Sections 3(3) and 6 of the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 (hereinafter referred to as 'the TADA Act'), Section 120B IPC; and Sections 5 and 6 of the Explosive Substances Act and Section 9B and 9C of the Explosive Act. After trial the Designated Court held the appellants guilty of offences punishable under Section 120B IPC, Sections 3(3) and 6(1) of the TADA, Section 5 of the Explosive Substances Act read with Section 120B of the IPC and Section 6 of the Explosive Substances Act. Learned Judge also held A-5 guilty of offences punishable under Sections 9B(i)(b) and 9C of the Explosives Act. Based on the said conviction, he imposed a sentence of 5 y...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1965All15; 1965CriLJ1
Uniyal, J.1. This appeal is directed against an order dated 31-8-1962 passed by the Assistant Sessions Judge, Meerut, acquitting Ram Pal respondent under Section 5 or the Explosive Substances Act. The respondent was tried for offences under Section 5 of the Explosive Substances Act as also under Sections 5 and 6 of the Explosives Act. He was convicted of the offence under Section 6 of the Explosives Act and sentenced to one year's rigorous imprisonment but was acquitted of the charges under Section 5 of the Explosive Substances Act as well as Section 5 of the Explosives Act. While the State has acquiesced in his acquittal under Section 5 of the Explosives Act it has challenged his acquittal under Section 5 of the Explosive Substances Act.2. The facts relating to the recovery or country made bomb material from the possession of the respondent on the night of the 8th January, 1960 have not been disputed. The report of Sri B. N. Dey, Inspector of Explosives, proved that the explosive mate...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 2000(4)ALLMR231; 2001(1)BomCR230
R.M. Lodha, J.1. The order passed by the Returning Officer, Agrasen Co-operative Bank Ltd., Yerawada, Pune (respondent No-3 herein) on 17-6-98 rejecting the nomination form of the present petitioner for election to the managing committee of Agrasen Co-operative Bank (respondent No. 4 herein) and the order dated 26-6-98 passed by the District Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies (Respondent No. 2 herein) confirming the order of respondent No. 3 are under challenge in this writ petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India.2. The petitioner is member of respondent . No. 4 Bank which is Urban Co-operative Bank and is notified society under section 73-IC of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960. The election programme for electing the managing committee members of the respondent No. 4 Society for the tenure of 1998-2003 was declared by the Registrar and the respondent No. 3 was appointed as Returning Officer. According to the election programme, the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
- 1 - R CRL.A No.1206 of 2017 C/W CRL.A No.820 of 2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE14H DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2022 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.VEERAPPA AND THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K. S. HEMALEKHA CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1206 OF2017C/W CRIMINAL APPEAL No.820 OF2017IN CRL.A. No.1206/2017 BETWEEN:1. SAYYED MOHAMMED NAUSHAD, S/O SAYED MOHAMMED IRSHAD, AGED ABOUT32YEARS, R/O SHADI MAHAL, DOOR NO.21-158-3, 1ST MAIN, SUBHASHNAGAR, PANDESHWAR, MANGALURU-575 001.2. AHAMAD BAVA ABOOBAKKAR, S/O ABOOBAKKAR, AGED ABOUT39YEARS, R/O BELLUR, HALEANGADY, MANGALURU-574 146. APPELLANTS (BY SRI TOMY SEBASTIAN, SENIOR COUNSEL A/W SRI RAVINDRA GOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR APPELLANT No.1; BY SRI C.H. JADHAV, SENIOR COUNSEL A/W MS. SAGARIKA RAMESH, ADVOCATE FOR APEELLANT No.2) - 2 - CRL.A No.1206 of 2017 C/W CRL.A No.820 of 2017 AND:1. STATE OF KARNATAKA, THOUGH STATION HOUSE OFFICER, ULLALA POLICE STATION, MANGALURU-575 020. REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KARNA...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
- 1 - R CRL.A No.1206 of 2017 C/W CRL.A No.820 of 2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE14H DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2022 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.VEERAPPA AND THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K. S. HEMALEKHA CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1206 OF2017C/W CRIMINAL APPEAL No.820 OF2017IN CRL.A. No.1206/2017 BETWEEN:1. SAYYED MOHAMMED NAUSHAD, S/O SAYED MOHAMMED IRSHAD, AGED ABOUT32YEARS, R/O SHADI MAHAL, DOOR NO.21-158-3, 1ST MAIN, SUBHASHNAGAR, PANDESHWAR, MANGALURU-575 001.2. AHAMAD BAVA ABOOBAKKAR, S/O ABOOBAKKAR, AGED ABOUT39YEARS, R/O BELLUR, HALEANGADY, MANGALURU-574 146. APPELLANTS (BY SRI TOMY SEBASTIAN, SENIOR COUNSEL A/W SRI RAVINDRA GOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR APPELLANT No.1; BY SRI C.H. JADHAV, SENIOR COUNSEL A/W MS. SAGARIKA RAMESH, ADVOCATE FOR APEELLANT No.2) - 2 - CRL.A No.1206 of 2017 C/W CRL.A No.820 of 2017 AND:1. STATE OF KARNATAKA, THOUGH STATION HOUSE OFFICER, ULLALA POLICE STATION, MANGALURU-575 020. REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KARNA...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : 1986CriLJ1576
L.P. Singh, J.1. Gajendra Singh petitioner (hereinafter referred to as the detenu) has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, challenging the validity of the order dt. 27-9-1984, passed by District Magistrate, Gorakhpur, under Section 3(2) of the National Security Act, 1980 ( No. 65 of 1980) hereinafter referred to as the Act detaining the detenu with a view to prevent him from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order.2. The detenu had been arrested on 26-9-83, when he was undergoing treatment in a hospital at Gorakhpur. The said detention order was served on him on 27-9-84 in District Jail, Gorakhpur. The grounds of the detention were also served on him along with the detention order. The said grounds are three in number, translated in English they are as follows : --i. That on 22-7-83 in the night at about 12.00, the detenu along with Tikori Singh and Surendra Singh residents of Kalesar, P. S. Sahjanwa, District Gorakhpur, and 6 to ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1976All266
ORDERP.N. Bakshi, J. 1. The petitioner is a registered Medical Graduate and resides in a house situate in an Ahata known as Chandrika Prasad Bagicha, situate in Mohalla Chunniganj, Kanpur. The Bagicha lies in one of the thickly populated commercial and residential localities of Kanpur. A trust was created in 1917 in respect of this Bagicha and one Mukandi Lal Garg was acting as its Managing Trustee till 22nd March, 1975, nO new trustee has since been appointed.2. The petitioner's case is that Srimati Rabia Begum respondent No. 4, who is a war widow, started raising construction over a portion of the afore-said Bagicha in May, 1975, in close proximity to the petitioner's residential house. On an enquiry the petitioner came to know that she had obtained a lease in respect of 1,000 Sq. yards of land in this Bagicha from Mukandi Lal Garg on 1-2-1975 for the construction of a godown for the storage of 500 gas cylinders. The petitioner's father Dr. M. G. Mangalani also resided with him. The ...
Tag this Judgment!