Court : Madhya Pradesh Jabalpur
..... additional session judge, katni in trial no.28 of 1995, whereby the appellant has been convicted under section 20(b) of the narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances act, 1985 (in short 'the ndps act') and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years with fine of rs.2,500/-. in default, the appellant shall suffer further ..... falsely implicated.6/ learned trial court, after appreciation of evidence, held that the accused/appellant was guilty of the offence punishable under section 20(b) of ndps act, convicted and sentenced him as mentioned herein above.7/ learned counsel for the appellant submitted that prosecution has failed to prove the compliance of section 42(1 ..... to be searched in presence of gazetted officer to accused and search and seizure. in this way there is a substantial compliance of section 57 of ndps act has been proved. 18/ learned counsel for appellant submitted that prosecution failed to prove, that seized article was kept in sealed packet before forwarding to .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh Jabalpur
..... by the special judge, chhatarpur in special case no.85/94, convicting the accused/appellant for the offence under section 20(a) of the narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the "ndps act") and directing to undergo the sentence of 3 years r.i. with fine of rs.10,000/-, in default 1 year r.i.2 ..... the appellant is the encroacher of the government land of khasra no.68 or owner thereof. in such circumstances, the presumption, as specified under section 54 of the ndps act, to prove possession of contraband, cannot be drawn against him. in that view of the matter, it is urged that once the prosecution failed to establish its case ..... the appellant or he is the encroacher thereupon. in absence of any material, no presumption can be drawn against the appellant as specified under section 54 of the ndps act because it is the rebutable presumption. in that view of the matter, i am of the considered opinion that place from which the cannabis plants were seized, do .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh Jabalpur
..... any right thereto and the evidence, if any, which he produces in respect of his claim:provided further that if any such article or thing, other than a narcotic drug, psychotropic substance, [controlled substance,] the opium poppy, coca plant or cannabis plant is liable to speedy and natural decay, or if the court is of opinion that its ..... the jeep, bearing registration no. mp-17-b-1901, as contained in the operative part of the judgment dated 17.9.2009 passed by special judge (under the narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances act, 1985) [for short 'the act'], rewa in special case no.14/2008. by that judgment, accused persons viz. sardar saket and babbu singh alias ..... 1. question of law which crops up for consideration on reference by single bench about the applicability of the proviso attached to section 63(2) of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances act, 1985 is :-"whether the proviso would be applicable to a case where a registered owner of the vehicle or his known agent and .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh Jabalpur
..... in special case no.658/2006, whereby the appellant was convicted for commission of offence punishable under section 20(b)(ii)(b) of the narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances act, 1985 (for short the "ndps act, 1985") and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for five years with fine of rs.15,000/-, in default of payment of fine amount, ..... the basis of aforesaid discussion, the appeal of the present appellant is partly allowed. the conviction of the appellant under section 20(b)(ii)(b) of the ndps act, 1985 is hereby maintained, but his sentence is reduced to the period which he has already undergone in the custody. the fine amount is also reduced from ..... defence witnesses.4. after considering the evidence adduced by the parties, the learned special judge under the ndps act, sidhi has found the appellant-accused guilty for commission of offence punishable under section 20(b)(ii)(b) of the ndps act, 1985 and inflicted the aforesaid sentence.5. i have heard learned counsel for the parties. 6. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh Jabalpur
1. learned special judge (narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances act, 1985) {for short 'ndps act'}, khandwa has passed the impugned judgment dated 8/9/2009 in special case no. 6/2009 whereby appellant has been convicted under section 8 read with section 20(b)(ii)( ..... to him and sent his opinion as ex.p/16.4. after usual investigation, appellant was charge sheeted before the special judge, (ndps act), khandwa, who framed the charge against the appellant under section 8/20 (b)(ii)(b) of ndps act. 5. accused/appellant abjured the guilt however, the special judge vide impugned judgment dated 8/9/2009 recorded conviction and sentence as .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh Jabalpur
..... viiia) of the act.9. section 62 of ndps act reads thus :- 62. confiscation of sale proceeds of illicit drugs or substances.- where any narcotic drug, psychotropic substance or controlled substance is sold by a person having knowledge or reason to believe that the drug or substance is liable to confiscation under this act ..... the sale proceeds thereof shall also be liable to confiscation.10. when it is not proved that seized currency notes are sale proceeds of psychotropic ..... (pw-1), sub inspector of police received a secret information that tenant of house no. 204, siddharth complex, bhopal is in possession of psychotropic substance and is likely to abscond. on the basis of the aforesaid information, sub inspector apprised his superior officer sanjay singh, csp, completed other .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh Jabalpur
1. This judgment will govern the disposal of both the above appeals.2. Appellants have filed these appeals against the judgment dated 16.8.2002 passed by VIIth Additional Sessions Judge, Jabalpur in Sessions Trial No.472/2001 convicting appellant Balram Patel under section 302 and appellant Gudda @ Vijay Patel under section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing each of them to imprisonment for life with fine of Rs.5000/-. In default of payment of fine, further rigorous imprisonment for 6 months.3. Prosecution story, as stated in the F.I.R. by Rajendra Tiwari (PW-1), is that on 14.3.2001, when he and Guddu Sharma (deceased) were in the house of Kanhaiyalal Naveriya (PW-5) in Barginagar, on the insistence of Guddu Sharma, they went to the house of accused Balram, as Guddu had to take money from him. When Balram was not found at his house, Guddu Sharma told to his wife to tell Balram that he should return his money otherwise he knew how to recover it. They went back to the house ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh Jabalpur
1. Being aggrieved by the award dated 18.11.2002 passed by Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Narsinghpur (in short 'the tribunal') in Claim Case No.6/98, appellant/claimant has preferred this appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 (for brevity 'the Act').2. Appellant/claimant filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Act through his father and natural guardian before the Tribunal for compensation to the tune of Rs.21,00,000/- for injuries sustained by him in the motor accident due to rash and negligent driving of minibus No.MP-20H-2408 by respondent no.2, belonging to respondent no.1 and insured with respondent no.3/Oriental Insurance Co. As per averments made in the claim petition, the accident occurred on 4.2.97 at 5:15 in the evening, when appellant/ claimant, a minor boy aged about five years while going by the roadside in front of the house of Soni compounder at Hardaul Bag, Gotegaon was dashed by minibus No.MP-20H-2408 being driven rashly and negligent...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh Jabalpur
1. Being aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 16.10.2003 , passed by Second Additional District Judge, Jabalpur in civil suit No. 128-A/03, plaintiff/appellant of F.A. No. 568/03, as well as defendant/appellant of F.A. No. 76/04 have preferred these two appeals under Section 96 of C.P.C.2. Since both these appeals arises from the same judgment and decree, therefore these appeals are being disposed of by this common judgment.3. The brief facts of the case is that, plaintiff/appellant of F.A. No. 568/03, filed a suit for declaration of title, possession and permanent injunction against the defendant/appellant of F.A. No. 76/04. He pleaded in the plaint interalia that he purchased the suit property from one Zanab Khan situated at Marhotal, area 70X70 sq.ft., out of Khasra No. 155 , by paying the consideration of Rs. 98,000/- in cash. Zanab Khan also executed an agreement to sale and power-of-attorney in the favour of plaintiff/appellant of F.A. No. 568/03, on 11.06.90. It is further...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh Jabalpur
(1) This writ appeal is directed under Section 2 of the Madhya Pradesh Uchcha Nyayalaya (Khand Nyayapeeth Ko Appeal) Adhiniyam, 2005 assailing the order dated 27.7.2010 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No.12435/05.(2) Learned counsel appearing for respondents raised following preliminary objections:-(i) That, before the writ Court appellant herein Smt.Kamla Singh was not a party, so she has no locus standi to file this writ appeal. (ii) Respondent No.4 to 7 were not party before the writ Court, so that they have been wrongly arrayed as respondents and the appellant be directed to delete the names of the these respondents.(iii) That Writ Petition No.12435/05 was decided by the Single Bench exercising the power under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against which no writ appeal lies, hence this writ appeal may be dismissed. (iv) It is also submitted that in Writ Petition No.12435/05, order passed by the Board of Revenue dated 29.12.2004 was assailed by the Stat...
Tag this Judgment!