Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: insecticides act 1968 section 26 notification of poisoning Court: supreme court of india Page 1 of about 575 results (0.201 seconds)

Dr. Ashok Vs. Union of India and Others

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR1997SC2298; JT1997(5)SC151; 1997(3)SCALE782; (1997)5SCC10; [1997]Supp1SCR14; 1997(2)LC127(SC)

..... in the two transferred cases, the notification dated 1.1.1996 of the central government issued in exercise of powers under sub-section (2) of section 27 of the insecticides act, 1968 phasing out progressively the manufacture and use of benzene hexachloride and directing that the certificate of registration in respect of benzene hexachloride ..... page - 115).12. benzene hexachloride, otherwise known as bhc is an insecticide specified in the schedule to the insecticides act, 1968 and is different from its formulations which would also be an insecticide within the meaning of section 3(e)(iii) of the said insecticides act, bhc is not used as such by farmer or consumer though its ..... must be rejected. before we part with this case, and having examined the different provisions of the insecticides act, 1968 we find that once a substance is specified in the schedule as contemplated under section 3(e)(i) then there is no power for cancelling the registration certification issued in respect of the .....

Gupta Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : 2002(2)ALD(Cri)571; JT2002(Suppl1)SC516; 2002(5)WLN776

..... court against the company and its managing director and directors, alleging commission of offence punishable under section 29(1)(a) of the insecticides act, 1968. by then the shelf-life of the insecticides in question had expired. section 29 provides that whoever imports, manufactures, sells, stocks, or exhibits for sale, or distributes any insecticides deemed to be misbranded under sub-clause (i) or sub-clause (iii) of ..... section 3(k), shall be punishable in the manner prescribed under the section.5. the appellants filed the application .....

Gene Campaign . Vs. Union Of India

Court : Supreme Court of India

..... can cause birth defects and damage to most plants that it comes into contact with. it is banned in europe and not permitted in india under the insecticides act, 1968 for mustard. it is an organophosphorus compound (toxic to biology) very similar in structure to glyphosate and as weeds become more resistant, they will eventually ..... the parliament. the answering of parliamentary questions is a part of the conduct of business of the parliament. therefore, no question about its admissibility under section 74, the indian evidence act, 1872 would arise. for ease of reference, the said questions and answers are extracted as under: writ petition (civil) no.115 of 2004 ..... koli samaj parivartan trust v. state of gujarat (2-judge bench)13, wherein this court while considering the functions of the ngt observed: 16. sections 14 and section 15 entrust adjudicatory functions to the ngt. the ngt is a specialized body comprising of judicial and expert members. judicial members bring to bear their experience .....

Pepsico India Holdings Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Food Inspector and anr.

Court : Supreme Court of India

..... malhotra also referred to the provisions of the insecticide act, 1968, which by virtue of the explanation to rule 65 has been made applicable to the said rule regarding usage of the expression "insecticide", and, in particular, section 33 thereof, which relates to offences so committed by a company. section 33 provides that in regard to offences by companies ..... "nil colouring matter", it would be a case of adulteration within the meaning of section 2(j) of the 1954 act, if the article contains any colouring matter.24. mr. bhat submitted that the question as to whether the insecticide residue found in the product of the appellants amounted to adulteration or not, is a ..... submitted for such analysis.31. ordinarily, since the level of insecticide residue was within the limits of tolerance prescribed for carbonated water with effect from 17th june, 2009, the same would not attract the provisions of section 2(m) of the 1954 act or the consequences thereof, but the finding of the public analyst .....

State of Nct of Delhi Vs. Rajiv Khurana

Court : Supreme Court of India

..... and establishes that fact. the present case is of total absence of requisite averments in the complaint."11. the respondent submitted that sub-section (2) of section 33 of the insecticides act, 1968 makes "other officers" liable, but that is essential liability not to the position and control of the company at the time of commission ..... that the complaint filed by the appellant before the trial court was sought to make the respondent vicariously liable under section 33 of the insecticides act, 1968 for the alleged offence under section 29 of the act, whereas no role has been ascribed to the respondent by the appellant towards the commission of the alleged offence. it ..... . our quality control is handled by mr. rajeev khurana, regional technical director."4. it is submitted that section 33 of the insecticides act, 1968 provides that:"33.offences by companies.-(1)whenever an offence under this act has been committed by a company, every person who at the time of the offence was committed was in .....

State of Haryana Vs. Unique Farmaid P. Ltd. ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : 1999(2)ALD(Cri)908; 2000CriLJ2962; JT1999(8)SC162; (2000)124PLR290; 1999(6)SCALE404; (1999)8SCC190; [1999]Supp3SCR451

..... challenged the three separate judgments of punjab and haryana high court quashing the complaints filed under section 29(1)(a) of the insecticides act, 1963 (for short, the 'act'). high court exercised its powers under section 482 of the crpc (for short, the 'code') read with article 227 of the ..... constitution of india. section 29 of the act provides for offences and punishment. under clause (a) of sub-section (1) of section 29 whoever imports, manufactures, sells, stocks; or exhibits for sale or distributes any insecticide ..... been deprived of their valuable right to have the sample tested from the central insecticides laboratory under sub-section (4) of section 24 of the act. under sub-section (3) of section 24 report signed by the insecticide analyst shall be evidence of the facts stated therein and shall be conclusive evidence .....

Northern Mineral Ltd Vs. Union of India and anr.

Court : Supreme Court of India

..... intention to adduce evidence in controversion of the report of the regional pesticides laboratory in terms of section 24(3) of the insecticides act, 1968 (hereinafter referred to as the "act"). he points out that the language of sub-section (3) as well as sub-section (4) of section 24 of the act is very clear and leaves no room of any ambiguity and it nowhere obliges the accused ..... to state that it intends to get sample analysed from the central insecticides laboratory. he emphasizes that sub-section (3) only .....

Medipol Pharmaceutical India Private Limited Vs. Post Graduate Institu ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

..... to claim that his conviction is vitiated by this circumstance of denial of this valuable right guaranteed by the act, as a result of the conduct of the prosecution. 211) likewise, under section 24 of the insecticides act, 1968, this court in state of haryana v. unique farmaid (p) ltd. (1998) 8 scc190held: 12 ..... . it cannot be gainsaid, therefore, that the respondents in these appeals have been deprived of their valuable right to have the sample tested from the central insecticides laboratory under sub- section (4) of section 24 of the act. under sub- section (3) of section ..... 24 report signed by the 2 pages 120-121. 12 insecticide analyst shall be evidence of the facts stated therein and shall be .....

Chitresh Kumar Chopra Vs. State (Govt. of Nct of Delhi)

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : 162(2009)DLT257(SC); JT2009(10)SC698; 2009(11)SCALE24

..... and, therefore, the high court was justified in dismissing the revision petition filed by the appellant, particularly when the scope of revision is very limited.10. section 306 of the ipc reads as under:306. abetment of suicideif any person commits suicide, whoever abets the commission of such suicide, shall be punished with ..... place in pursuance of that conspiracy, and in order to the doing of that thing; or thirdly, intentionally aids, by any act or illegal omission, the doing of that thing. explanation to section 107 states that any wilful misrepresentation or wilful concealment of material fact which he is bound to disclose, may also come within ..... new delhi in furtherance of common intention, mentally tortured jitender sharma and abetted him to commit suicide by your said act of mental torture and thus you thereby committed an offence punishable under section 306 read with section 34 of ipc and within cognizance of this court...6. aggrieved by the framing of the charge, the appellant .....

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 .....