Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: insecticides act 1968 section 26 notification of poisoning Court: mumbai Page 1 of about 276 results (0.063 seconds)

indofil Chemicals Company, Bombay and Others Vs. Kunwarsingh Madhaosin ...

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 1996CriLJ1234

..... , heard both the sides. 2. the first respondent filed a complaint in the court below against the petitioners alleging offence under section 29(1)(b) and section 9(1)(3) and section 17(1)(c) of insecticides act, 1968. the allegation in the complaint is that the accused no. 1 is a company and accused nos. 2 to 14 are ..... as far as the question of sanction is concerned, there is no dispute that a sanction is a condition precedent for a prosecution under the act. section 31 of the insecticides act, 1968 clearly provides that no prosecution lies except with the written sanction of the state government. it is true that in the complaint there is no ..... as far as second question of limitation, we find that the offence is punishable with imprisonment of two years or fine as provided in section 29(1) of the insecticides act, 1968. the period of limitation is prescribed in section 466 of the code of criminal procedure which reads as follows : '468. bar to taking cognizance after lapse of the period of .....

Mangesh G. Salodkar Vs. Monsanto Chemicals of India Ltd. and ors.

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 2007(2)BomCR883

..... hospitalization expenses. monsanto also records that it paid ex-gratia. monsanto has stated before the court that it has all the requisite statutory permissions including those under the factories act, 1948 and the insecticides act, 1968. no complaint was made by the petitioner to any of the authorities constituted under the governing statutes in india. monsanto states before the court that it holds accreditations ..... licences, apart from other times;(vii) the state government shall consider issuance of directions for the appointment of safety officers in the case of factories involved in hazardous processes under section 40b(1)(ii) irrespective of the size of the factory and the number of workers employed therein;(viii) the operations of the factories' inspectorates must be computerised. modern methods of .....

Shivkumar Alias Shiwalamal Narumal Chugwani Proprietor of Kanhaiya Gen ...

Court : Mumbai

..... be found in other enactments, which frustrates the smooth implementation of these enactments.the insecticides act, 1968(d) section 29 of the insecticides act reads thus:offences and punishment. (1) whoever (a) imports, manufactures, sells, stocks or exhibits for sale or distributes any insecticide deemed to be misbranded under subclause (i) or subclause (iii) or subclause ..... me in implementing the penal provisions of (i) the insecticides act, 1968 and (ii) the drugs and cosmetics act 1940 besides pointing out the changes required in these laws due to change in social order.the seeds act, 1966(a) section 19 of the seeds act reads as under:penalty - if any person (a) ..... in the offences taking place in relation to prevention of food adulteration act 1954, the seeds act 1966, the insecticides act 1968 and the drugs and cosmetics act 966 and in the instant cases in relation to prevention of food adulteration act and having found pitiable condition in relation to the misconceptions, knowledge and .....

Bharat Palverising Mills Ltd. Vs. Collr. of Cus.

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in : (1997)(93)ELT628Tri(Mum.)bai

..... is otherwise not challenged.8. there does not appear any general instructions or any notification issued by the registration committee established under section 5 of the insecticides act, 1968 to the effect that registration certificates issued by them but which do not bear the endorsement of source of acquisition shall not be ..... dr. n.r. kantawala, the ld. advocate for the appellants has submitted that the appellants have been holding certificate for registration contemplated under section 9 of the insecticides act, 1968, since 1973, and have also been causing import of the subject item ever since then, and have been getting them cleared under ogl ..... clearance thereof under ogl. they initially filed into bond bill of entry. the item imported was covered under insecticides act, 1968. the appellants were holding registration certificate issued under section 9 of the said act. the said certificates however did not specify the approved source of import. instructions were issued vide letter dated .....

Prabhakar Tulshiramji Mankar and ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors ...

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 2005(2)ALLMR34; 2005(2)BomCR268; 2005(1)MhLj228

..... possession of the petitioners, were misbranded or not.18. the licensing authority and the appellate authority have ignored the provision contained in sub-section (3) of section 30 of the insecticides act, 1968 where under the presumption is to protect the licensee if the conditions laid down therein are fulfilled. in earlier part of the judgment ..... achalpur, in regular criminal case no. 174 of 1993, in respect of the same alleged misbranded insecticides, for offences under sections 420, 486 r/w 34 of the indian penal code and section 29 of the insecticides act, 1968. mr. naik, the learned counsel for the petitioners has placed before the court the judgments of the ..... authorities in right perspective.10. the learned counsel for the petitioners, placing reliance on sub-section (3) of section 30 of the insecticides act, 1968, submitted that a person not being an importer or a manufacturer of an insecticide or his agent for the distribution thereof, shall not be liable for a contravention of any .....

New Chemi Industries Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India and ors.

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : AIR1985Bom408

..... mandatory provisions of the statute in question.2. this petition arises out of proceedings under the insecticides act, 1968 (hereinafter the act) which was enacted by parliament in 1968 to regulate the import, manufacture, sale, transport, distribution and use of insecticide with a view to prevent risk to human beings or animals, and for matters connected ..... scheme of s. 9 itself clearly shows that only the first application for registration of a particular insecticide is governed by sub-sec. (3) thereof, while subsequent applications for registration of the same insecticide are all governed by sub- sec. (4) thereof . plain reading and the clear language of s. 9 shows that once ..... all subsequent applications by other persons or parties in respect of the same insecticide would in law fall under and stand governed by sub-sec. (4) of s. 9 of the act. and under the express terms of this sub-section the petitioners:'........ shall on application and on payment of prescribed fee be allotted .....

Hardware Trading Corporation Vs. Commr. of Cus.

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

..... heading no. 38.08. the said circular also referred to itc (hs), wherein it is stated that boric acid is freely importable, if registered and not prohibited for import under insecticides act, 1968. the board also clarified that in case of import of boric acid by traders, they would require registration with cib and rc. in view of the circular, the customs directed ..... for the interpretation of the custom tariff or excise tariff provide as under: classification of goods in this schedule shall be governed by the following principles: 1. the titles of sections, chapters and sub-chapters are "1. provided for ease of reference only; for legal purpose, classification shall be determined according to the terms of the headings and any relative .....

Ashok Sureshchand Bal and ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : (2002)1BOMLR483; 2002(1)MhLj211

..... can give evidence to disprove such fact,20. in state of haryana v. unique farmaid (p) ltd. and others (supra), while dealing with the provisions of insecticides act, 1968, the accused within the statutory time limit had notified to the inspector of his intention to adduce evidence in controversion of the analyst's report and requested him ..... , reported in : 2001crilj1686 .15. coming to the last submission of learned advocate for the petitioners which centers around the valuable right as provided under section 25(4) of the act, it has been urged by the learned advocate for the petitioners that on account of negligence inaction on the part of the prosecution agency, this valuable ..... its discretion at the request either of the complainant or the accused cause the sample of the drug (or cosmetic) produced before the magistrate under sub-section (4) of section 23 to be sent for test or analysis to the said laboratory, which shall make the test or analysis and report in writing signed by, or .....

Devanshi Impex P. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs (General) Mumbai

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

..... to human beings. as may be seen, the aforementioned provisions of the said section 38 of the insecticides act, 1968 are unambiguous and leave no scope for interpretation. essentially, the exemption from the provisions of the said act would apply to those insecticides that are used for household purposes etc or for other than insecticidal purposes. thus, import of items listed under schedule 3 of the said ..... chemical, can be used for insecticide purpose and as they are covered under the insecticide act, 1968, the appellant is required to register with central insecticide board (cib). as the appellant has not obtained registration under the insecticide act, 1968, the impugned goods were held liable for confiscation, and, accordingly the same were confiscated absolutely and penalty under section 112(a) of the customs act, 1962 has been imposed on .....

United Phosphorus Ltd., Vs. the State of Maharashtra and ors.

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 2009(111)BomLR973

..... the apex court held that the accused were deprived of their valuable right to have the sample tested from the central insecticide laboratory as permissible under subclause (4) of section 24 of the insecticides act, 1968. considering the fact that by the time the matter reached the court, the shelf life of the sample had already expired ..... relied upon certificate of analysis issued by their own laboratory. the necessary sanction was accorded as required under section 31(1) of the insecticides act, 1968, on 1.4.1998 by the commissioner of agriculture. the insecticide inspector lodged complaint before the learned judicial magistrate, aurangabad on 24.4.1998.3. there is no dispute ..... of the report to the person from whom the sample was taken. the relevant provision contained in section 24(3) of the insecticides act, 1968, would make it amply clear that the report signed by the insecticide analyst shall be the conclusive evidence of the facts stated therein. there is deeming effect about its .....