Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances act 1985 section 68s information to competent authority Court: supreme court of india Page 8 of about 83 results (0.115 seconds)

State of Rajasthan Vs. Daulat Ram

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR2005SC3816; 2006(1)ALD(Cri)45; 2005CriLJ4117; 2005(102)ECC139; JT2005(8)SC82; RLW2005(4)SC2527; (2005)7SCC36; 2005(2)LC1421(SC)

..... the aforesaid judgment of this court, there is no scope for the argument that in the facts and circumstances of this case, the provisions of section 50 of the ndps act were attracted. the judgment and order of the high court must, therefore, be set aside.6. counsel for the appellant submitted that a person cannot be compelled to ..... person on his head is searched and found to contain contraband opium, it would amount to a personal search, and, therefore, the provisions of section 50 of the ndps act would be applicable. in the instant case, the high court held that the respondent was carrying a bag on his head which was searched and found to contain contraband ..... morphine respectively.'4. the respondent was put up for trial before the special judge, ndps cases who found him guilty of the offence under section 8/18 of the ndps act. the appeal preferred by the respondent, as noticed earlier, was allowed by the high court and he was acquitted of the charges leveled against him. the judgment of .....

Amritlal and ors. Vs. Union Govt. Through Secy. Ministry of Finance an ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR2000SC3675; 2001(1)ALD(Cri)382; 2001ALLMR(Cri)745(SC); 2001CriLJ474; 2001(73)ECC10; 2000(7)SCALE597; [2000]Supp4SCR450; 2001(1)LC555(SC)

..... the addl. district judge, neemuch, rejected the application. subsequently however they were detained under section 3(1) of the prevention of illicit traffic in narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances act, 1988 (for short 'the pitndps act') by order dated 5.6.1997. the record depicts that the grounds of detention were communicated to ..... recording of the concerned officer in the matter under reference ought to be noticed and the same reads as below:-even though prosecution proceedings under narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances act, 1985 have been initiated against shri amritlal i am satisfied that there is compelling necessity in view of the likelihood of his ..... event of his being granted bail, the likelihood of his indulging in illicit traffic in narcotic drugs as is evident from the trend of his activities, to detain him under the prevention of illicit traffic in narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances act, 1988.5. it is this reasoning which the learned advocate contended that .....

G. Srinivas Goud Vs. State of A.P.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR2005SC3647; 2005CriLJ4367; JT2005(12)SC215; 2005(8)SCALE34; (2005)8SCC183; 2005(2)LC1509(SC)

..... 1. these two appeals arise from a common judgment of the high court maintaining the conviction of the appellants under section 22 of the narcotics drugs and psychotropic substances act 1985 (for short ndps act) and sentencing both of them to rigorous imprisonment for ten years and a fine of rupees one lakh each, in default of payment ..... of search, seizure and arrest. section 42 does not use the words 'officers of gazetted rank'. it covers all empowered officers of the central excise, narcotics, customs, revenue intelligence or any other department of central government including officers of para military and armed forces and officers of state governments. what is important is ..... and urea. the defence of the appellants was that of total denial. the trial court convicted both the accused for offence under section 22 of the ndps act and sentenced them as aforesaid. the high court maintained the conviction while dismissing the appeals of both the accused.3. the learned counsel for the appellant .....

Union of India (Uoi) Vs. Satrohan

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : 2008(56)BLJR2537; JT2008(8)SC148; 2008(10)SCALE138; (2008)8SCC313; 2008(2)LC936(SC); 2008(8)SCC313; 2008(5)LH(SC)3232

..... for his belief under the proviso thereto, he shall forthwith send a copy thereof to his immediate official superior. this was the statutory provision at the relevant time. by the narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances (amendment) act, 2001 which came into force on 2-10-2001, section 42(2) was amended whereunder the information taken down in writing under sub-section (1) or ..... district and sessions judge, lucknow in criminal appeal no. 65 of 1993. the trial court had convicted the respondent for offences punishable under section 8(c) and 15 of the narcotics drugs and psychotropic substances act, 1985 (in short the `act') and sentenced to undergo ri for 10 years and fine of rupees one lakh with default stipulation.2. prosecution version in a .....

Shanti Lal Vs. State of M.P.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : 2007(2)BLJR2814; 2008CriLJ386; JT2007(12)SC1; 2008(1)KLT503(SC); 2008(1)MPHT1(SC)

..... would apply to special laws and offences committed by a person not covered by ipc. in the present case, we are concerned with the provisions of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances act, 1985 which is a special law. there is no express power in a court to order imprisonment in default of payment of fine. but ..... in special criminal case no. 12 of 1994. both the courts convicted the appellant herein for an offence under section 8 read with section 18 of the narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as 'the act') and ordered him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and also to pay fine of rupees ..... m. in the morning, station house officer, ratangarh received secret information through an informant that one shantilal (appellant herein) resident of village kankariya talai was carrying narcotic drug and was expected to have come from the said village. he was to carry illegal opium to beju (rajasthan). the information was recorded by the officer in .....

Sami Ullaha Vs. Superintendent, Narcotic Central Bureau

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR2009SC1357; 2008(57)BLJR179; 2009CriLJ1306; JT2008(12)SC297; RLW2009(2)SC1823; 2008(4)SCALE355:2009AIRSCW778:2008(6)LHSC4213

..... 439 of the code of criminal procedure are fulfilled.in any event, as the central revenue control laboratory, new delhi is not a designated chemical examiner as defined in the narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances rules, 1985 (for short 'the rules'), reliance thereupon could not have been placed particularly when the laboratory which comes within the definition of the term 'chemical examiner' had ..... him. on the basis of the said statement, the appellant was arrested on 15.08.2004. allegedly, a statement was made by him in terms of section 67 of the narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances act, 1985 (for short 'the act'). appellant contends that he was tortured and the statement was obtained forcibly from him on some blank documents. he later on retracted .....

Smt. Heena Kausar Vs. Competent Authority

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR2008SC2427; 2008CriLJ3024; 2008(7)SCALE331; 2008AIRSCW3699; AIR2008SC2427; 2008CriLJ3024; 2008(3)AICLR25

..... in dispute.3. appellant herein is wife of one iqbal mohammed memon. an order of detention was passed against him under the provisions of the prevention of illicit traffic in narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances act, 1988 (pindps act) by the state of marharashtra. allegedly, both the appellant and her husband left india in or about the year 1991. appellant has not ..... s.b. sinha, j.1. validity of the proviso appended to section 68c of the narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances act, 1985 (ndps act) is in question in this appeal which arises out of a judgment and order dated 27.11.2002 passed by a division bench of the high court of ..... counsel would submit that the show cause notice did not contain any reason which was required to be recorded in terms of section 68e read with section 68h of the ndps act, and, thus, the impugned judgment cannot be sustained.admittedly, the order of the appellate authority was the subject matter of the writ petition. the contentions raised herein were .....

Sayed Abul Ala Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : 2007AIRSCW6974.

..... 11, 1988. the grounds of detention disclose that the appellants were engaged in activities which are offences punishable with imprisonment under the provisions of the narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances act, 1985. it cannot, therefore, be said that there was a reasonable prospect of the appellants not being further remanded to custody on ..... antecedent activities and material on record. i am therefore satisfied that there is compelling necessity to detain him under the prevention of illicit traffic in narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances act, 1988 with a view to preventing him from engaging in such activities.16. it is no doubt true that in the order ..... singh, learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant. in the impugned order of detention it has been stated as under:even though prosecution proceedings under narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances act, 1985 act, 1985 have been initiated against shri sayed abul ala and even though he continues to be in judicial custody, i .....

iqbal Moosa Patel. Vs. State of Gujarat.

Court : Supreme Court of India

..... dismissed and the conviction of the appellants for offences punishable under section 8(c), read with sections 21 and 29 of the narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as "the ndps act") upheld. while appellants in criminal appeals no.2327 of 2006 and 754 of 2007 have been sentenced to undergo twelve years ..... driven by accused no.4-ashuram durgaram choudhary while accused no.3-derajram jat was accompanying him. the search of the truck led to the seizure of psychotropic drugs from the aforesaid two persons who revealed that the consignment in question had been supplied by mr. hemaram choudhary-accused no.2. on the basis of ..... story was totally false and that the trial court had rightly rejected as unworthy of any credit the statement allegedly recorded under section 67 of the ndps act. it was further submitted that out of two panch witnesses pw3-jignesh jaswantbhai modi had not supported the prosecution case including the recovery of the contraband .....

State of Punjab Vs. Makhan Chand

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : 2004(1)ALD(Cri)773; (2004)92CTR(SC)564; 2004(92)ECC564; JT2004(3)SC360; 2004(2)SCALE778; (2004)3SCC453

..... 1) does not empower the central government to lay down the procedure for search of an accused, but only deals with the disposal of seized narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances.11. secondly, when the very same standing orders came up for considerations in khet singh v. union of india, this court took the ..... of the high court of punjab & haryana acquitting the respondent of the charge framed against him under section 18 r/w section 21 of the narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as 'the act').2. the relevant facts necessary for disposal of this appeal are as under:-on ..... firstly, section 51a, as the marginal note indicates, deals with 'disposal of seized narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances'. under sub-section (1), the central government, by a notification in the official gazette, is empowered to specify certain narcotic drugs or psychotropic substance's having regard to the hazardous nature, vulnerability to theft, substitution, constraints of .....