Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: insecticides act 1968 section 10 appeal against non registration or cancellation Page 13 of about 2,478 results (0.293 seconds)

Ram Swaroop vs.state of Delhi

Court : Delhi

..... it should be proved that the person making it knew that he was dying or believed himself to be in danger of approaching death. it was decided under section 29 of act 2 of 1855 which was similar to the english law with the exception that the declarant might have entertained hope of recovery].. (2) the admissibility of dying ..... interpret the words and phrases that nothing becomes otiose i.e. redundant. in a manner crl.a. 930/2001 page 11 of 23 58. dealing with section 32 of the evidence act and quoting with approval passages from the law of evidence by woodroffe and amir ali, in the decision air1959sc18 ratan gond v. state of bihar, the supreme ..... the accused cannot be held liable for the offence of having abetted the suicide of the deceased. the second issue that whether the dying declaration was admissible under section 32 of indian evidence act also came up for consideration before this court in sandy @ ved prakash (supra) wherein this court held- 48. with the advent of adversarial trials, it .....

A.S. Dalela, Food Corporation of India Vs. State of Haryana

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : [1995]82CompCas71(P& H); [1995(70)FLR674]

..... specific allegation is made against the accused the process issued against him is to be quashed. the provisions of section 33 of the insecticides act, 1968, are identical to the provisions of section 11 referred above and in a case under the insecticides act reported as vyapak puri v. state of punjab [1991] 3 rcr 501 (p & h) where prosecution ..... petitioner could not be made liable for any default committed by any of the employees of the company. he referred to section 11 of the act which reads as under :'(1) where an offence under this act has been committed by a company, every person who, at the time the offence was committed, was in charge of, ..... harmohinder kaur sandhu, j.1. the labour and enforcement officer (central), chandigarh, filed a complaint under section 10b of the equal remuneration act, 1976 (for short 'the act'), for breach of section 8, read with rule 6, of the act. as per the averments made in the complaint shri a.s. dalela, petitioner, while executing the work of storage .....

Mysore Agro Chemical Company Private Ltd. and anr. Vs. Union of India ...

Court : Guwahati

..... assertions deserve to be minuted. introducing itself to be a private limited company incorporated under the companies act, 1956, the petitioner has averred that it is registered as well under section 9(4) of the insecticides act, 1968 (hereafter referred to as the act) as a manufacturer of different insecticides including different types of solvents (xylene, cyclohexanone, apromax etc.) and emulsifiers (snt a, snt b etc). the ..... make their offers. the edifice of this argument is built on the provisions of the act and the rules on the supposition that bionol or cardol/cardonol is an insecticide as comprehended by these legislations. insecticide has been defined in section 3(e) of the act, as hereunder.3(e)... insecticide(i) any substance specified in the schedule; or(ii) such other substances (including fungicides and .....

U.S. Madan and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : 2002CriLJ408; 2002(2)WLN243

..... manufacturers with the prayer that the proceedings of criminal case no. 160/83 state v. kishan beej bhandar for the offence under section 17(1)(a) punishable under section 29(1)(a) of the insecticides act, 1968 (hereinafter referred to as 'the act of 1968') pending in the court of addl. chief judicial magistrate, sangaria be quashed.2-3. it arises in the following circumstances :--on 14 ..... .c.for the reasons stated above, this petition filed by the petitioners under section 482, cr. p.c. is allowed and the proceedings of criminal case no. 160/83 state v. kishan beej bhandar for the offence under section 17(1)(a) punishable under section 29(1))(a) of the insecticides act, 1968 pending in the court of addl. chief judicial magistrate, sangaria, so far as .....

Joint Director of Agriculture (inputs) Directorate of Agriculture, Che ...

Court : Chennai

Reported in : 1996CriLJ530

..... challenge urged on behalf of the respondents. the preamble to the insecticides act, 1968, reads that it was enacted by the parliament, as an act to regulate the import, manufacture, sale, transport, distribution and use of insecticides with a view to prevent risk to human beings or animals and for matters connected therewith.' 9. section 3(k) in so far as it is relevant for our ..... accordance with law. 6. the learned single judge was of the view that the insecticides act, 1968 was enacted to regulate the import, manufacture, sale, transport, distribution and use of insecticides with a view to prevent risk to human beings or animals and for matters connected therewith and that a combined reading of sec. 3(e), 3(k) 14, 19, 20 and 24 of the .....

Cadila Health Care Ltd. and ors. Vs. the State of Rajasthan and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : 2007CriLJ1899

..... the accused company and its director who had no occasion to request the court to get another sample tested in central insecticides laboratory. the court held that they have been deprived of their valuable right under section 24(4) of the insecticides act, 1968 and ultimately, criminal proceeding was quashed on this ground. relevant paras 13, 15 and 17 of this judgment read as follows ..... :13. sub-section (2) of section 24 enjoins an obligation on the insecticide inspector to deliver one copy of the report to the person from whom .....

S.M.P. Private Limited Vs. the State

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : 1981CriLJ764

..... . s.m.t. private limited, subash road, jogeswari street, bombay, as the 1st, 2nd and 3rd accused respectively, for an offence punishable under section 29(1)(a) ofthe insecticides act, 1968 (which will hereinafter be referred to as the act). the insecticides in question is malstan ec 50 and a sample of it was seized from the 1st accused, who is the stockist and seller. when ..... the sample was sent to the insecticides analyst, he reported, after due analysis, that it was misbranded. a copy of the report of the analyst .....

Union of India (Uoi) and ors. Vs. Pesticides Manufacturing and Formula ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR2003SC1; 100(2002)DLT323(SC); 2000(84)ECC242; 2002LC558(SC); 2002(146)ELT19(SC); JT2002(8)SC378; (2002)8SCC410; [2002]SUPP3SCR231

..... at least for thepurposes of the import/export policy. for example, sub-heading3808.10.11 mentions 'aldrin' as a form of insecticide.against that sub-heading. it is provided that it is freelyimportable/exportable "if registered and not prohibited forimport under insecticides act, 1968 and formulations thereof".similarly, 3808.90.10 provides for 'pesticides, not elsewherespecified'. it is treated as a free item under ..... dispute by the appellants. incidentally the concessionwas also made before the high court in the appellants'affidavit. besides the circular dated 27^th july 1995 issued bycbec under section 37b of the central excise act, 1944 statedthat "the pesticide chemicals and formulations will both beclassified under heading 38.08 of the ceta, 1985". similarlythe department of revenue's circular dated 28^th .....

G.S. Prasad and ors. Vs. State Represented by the Assistant Director o ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : 2002(1)ALD(Cri)314; 2002(1)ALT(Cri)231

..... . 'it is under those circumstances, the supreme court came to the conclusion that the accused therein were deprived of their valuable right to have the sample tested from the central insecticides laboratory under sub-section (4) of section 24 of the insecticides act, 1968.the supreme court further took note of the fact that the accused in the said case notified to the ..... to the accused and the prosecution launched based upon such reports, which are hit by the rule, would get vitiated. the supreme court while interpreting section 24 of the insecticides act, 1968 which is in pari materia to rule 21 (3) of the seeds rules, 1968 observed:'then in order to safeguard the right of the accused to have the sample tested from the central .....

Tangudu Someswara Rao and ors. Vs. State of A.P. Rep., by Its Public P ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : 2001(2)ALD(Cri)626; 2001(2)ALT(Cri)352; 2002CriLJ510

..... 1998 on the file of the judicial i class magistrate, palasa. the prosecution was launched against the accused on the complaint filed under section 29(i)(a) r/w sec. 3k(i)(viii) of the insecticides act, 1968, and rule 19 of the insecticides rules, 1971. the complainant was examined as pw-1 on 27.11.1998 and the charges were framed on 4.2.1999 .....