Court : Patna
P.K. Sinha, J.1. This application under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner Satyendra Prasad Singh praying therein to quash the entire criminal proceeding including order of cognizance recorded by Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Muzaffarpur dated 16.9.1988 against the petitioner, under Section 20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985 'the Act' in short) in Custom Case No. 25 of 1987.2. In nutshell, the prosecution case is that on 20.2.1987 some persons on motorcycle were chased by Custom Officials but they fled away leaving behind motorcycle, from search of which three pockets of Nepali Ganja weighing 15 kg. were recovered. It was found that the petitioner was the owner of the motorcycle and was carrying the contraband. The claim of the petitioner is that on 21.2.1987 this petitioner had lodged a case before the Police alleging theft of the aforesaid motorcycle.3. Vide order dated 6.9.1994 learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Muzaffarp...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 2010CriLJ327
N.A. Britto, J.1. This appeal is by the accused, who has been convicted and sentenced under Section 20(b)(ii)(C) of the NDPS Act, 1985 for having been found in possession of 4.85 kgs of charas on 6/03/2007 at 14.05 hrs. near the road junction leading to Club Cubana at Arpora, Bardez-Goa.2. The case of the accused was one of denial simpliciter, though in the cross-examination of the witnesses examined by the prosecution, it was suggested that the accused was arrested from a party which was going on at Carona, Aldona, in connection with holi celebrations.3. The prosecution had examined 6 witnesses including the police inspector Shri Dias, who had conducted the raid, based on a prior information. After considering the evidence produced by the prosecution, the learned Special Judge came to the conclusion that the prosecution had proved, on the basis of oral as well as contemporaneous documentary evidence, that the accused was found at that place in possession of suspected drugs which were ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
A.S. Gadkari, J. This Appeal has been preferred by the Appellant under Section 12 of the Maharashtra Control of Organized Crime Act, 1999 ('MCOC Act' for brevity) thereby challenging the order passed by the Learned Special Judge, Pune under the MCOC Act, below Exhibit 4 in MCOCA Special Case No.7 of 2012, thereby rejecting his application preferred under Section 227 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for discharge. The Appellant questions the correctness of the said order dated 4 March 2013 passed below Exhibit 4 in Special case No.7 of 2012. The Appellant has challenged the said order mainly on two grounds i.e. (i) that there is no material at all on record for framing a charge against him and (ii) there is a total non application of mind of the competent authorities while granting prior approval as contemplated under Section 23(1)(a) and sanction as contemplated under Section 23(2) of the MCOC Act. 2. It appears from the record that the complainant Smt. Parvin Anwar Shaikh has lodged ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jharkhand
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B. A. No. 1962 of 2013 Nepali Ganjhu @ Nepali Singh @ Nepali Ji @ Gorai Ganjhu ..... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .. Opposite Party -------- CORAM : HONBLE MR. JUSTICE H. C. MISHRA ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Manoj Kumar No.2, Advocate For the State : A.P.P. ------ 3/ 17.06.2013 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the Prosecution. The petitioner has been made accused for the offences under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 353 of the Indian Penal Code, Sections 25(1-B)(a), 27, 35 of the Arms Act, Sections 3, 4 of the Explosive Substance Act and Section 17 of the C.L.A. Act, in connection with Manatu P.S. Case No. 77 of 2005 corresponding to G.R. No. 1956 of 2005, S.T. No. 389 of 2011. Though the petitioner is named in the FIR on the basis of statement made by the apprehended co-accused, it is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that some of the co-accused persons, who faced trial, have been acqu...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1965All274; 1965CriLJ672
M.H. Beg, J.1. The appellant Sheo Ratan Upadhya filed a complaint against the respondents, Gopal Chandra Nepali, Manager Sarvahitalshi Company, a publishing house of Varanasi, and Mahadeo Prasad, the proprietor of Deepak Press of Varanasi, for an alleged infringement of the copyright of a work called 'Shri Mahabharat' in Nepali language which was written by the complainant's father, Pandit Narendra Nath Upadhya. The book was first published in 1929 through the Sarvahitalshi Company during tne life time of its author who died on 19th June 1950, The complainant, the eldest son of his father, does not seem to possess personal knowledge about the publication or sale of the book and states in his complaint that he was busy with his studies until recently when he took up the management of the affairs of the family. The complainant alleges that his father had told him that he had never sold the copyright of the abovementloned work, which is mere hearsay and an admission in his own favour.2. T...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jharkhand
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 6756 of 2011 Nepali Ganjhu @ Gorai Ganjhu Versus The State of Jharkhand CORAM: ..... . PetitionerOpposite PartyHONBLE MR. JUSTICE H.C. MISHRA :Mr. Surendra Prasad Sinha :A. P.P.For the Petitioner For the State 02/10.10.2011----Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. forthe Prosecution. Petitioner has been made accused for the offence under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 364, 120B of the Indian Penal Code and 17 of C.L.A. Act, in connection with S. T. Case No. 46 of 2010 arising out of Patan P.S. Case No. 179 of 2004, corresponding to G.R. Case No. 1518 of 2004. The case relates to abduction and murder of one Pankaj Kumar. The petitioner is not named in the FIR. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no eye witness to the occurrence and the petitioner is not named in the FIR and, accordingly, has prayed for bail. From the impugned order, it appears that only material against this petitioner is that the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RESERVED ON :5. h DECEMBER, 2016 DECIDED ON :3. d MARCH, 2017 SETE NEPALI CRL.A.432/2013 Through : Ms.Sunita Arora, Advocate. ..... Appellant B.N.MEENA CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG VERSUS Through : Mr.P.C.Aggarwal, Advocate. ..... Respondent + S.P.GARG, J.1. Challenge in this appeal is a judgment dated 31.10.2012 of learned Addl. Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No.01/03/2010 by which the appellant Sete Nepali @ Sarki was held guilty for committing offence punishable under Section 20(c) of Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (In short NDPS Act). By an order dated 19.11.2012, he was sentenced to undergo RI for ten years with fine `1 lac.2. Shorn of necessary details, the prosecution case was that on 25.11.2009 at about 12.45 p.m. the appellant was intercepted by the Custom Officers at the office of Himalyan Courier Company at House No.193, Shop No.17, New Camp, Majnu Ka Tila, Delhi-54 and was found in possession of 20.774 k...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
FAO No.1374 of 1999 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.1374 of 1999 Date of Decision.21.05.2013 Chander Kanta Verma wd/o W.C. Verma son of Nand Lal and others .....Appellants Versus Arun Kumar Nepali son of Narain Bahadur and others .......Respondents Present: Mr. Anil Khetarpal, Advocate for the appellants. Mr. Paul S. Saini, Advocate for respondent-insurance company. None for other respondents. CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN 1 Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?. Yes 2. To be referred to the Reporters or No.?. Yes 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?. Yes -.- K. KANNAN J.(ORAL) 1. The appeal comes out of an order of dismissal of a claim petition made under the Motor Vehicles Act for death of a person by the use of a mechanical contrivance which the petitioner claimed was a motor vehicle. The contention of the respondents was that the machine was not a motor vehicle under the Act ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jharkhand
In the High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi B.A. No.7766 o1. Amit Dey @ Nepali Dey @ Amit Kumar Dey 2. Bikram Dey @ Bikram Kumar Dey ...............Petitioners VERSUS State of Jharkhand ... Opposite Party CORAM: HONBLE MR.JUSTICE R.R.PRASAD For the Petitioners: Mr.Indrajit Sinha For the State : A.P.P 2.11.9.13. I.A.No.6976 of 2013 Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and learned counsel appearing for the State. The petitioners are accused in Gomia P.S. case no.58 of 2013 registered under sections 147, 148, 149, 332, 333, 353, 323,307 of the Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that it is the case of the prosecution that members of the mob to which these two petitioners were also the party attacked police personnel whereby four police personnel sustained injury but those injuries are simple in nature except one injury. Considering all these aspects of the matter, other persons, who were members of the mob have been admitted to bail by the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Gujarat High Court Case Information System BODY {SCROLLBAR-FACE-COLOR: #d4d0c8; SCROLLBAR-HIGHLIGHT-COLOR: #808080; SCROLLBAR-SHADOW-COLOR: #d4d0c8; SCROLLBAR-ARROW-COLOR: #ffffff; scrollbar-dark-shadow-color: #ffffff} SPAN.searchword { background-color:yellow; } function loadSearchHighlight() { var chkParamC = "txtSearch" if (chkParamC == "txtSearch") { SearchHighlight(); document.searchhi.h.value = searchhi_string; if( location.hash.length > 1 ) location.hash = location.hash; } } Print CR.MA/12204/20113/3ORDERINTHE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABADCRIMINALMISC.APPLICATION No. 12204 of 2011=========================================PREMBAHADUR@JITU NEPALI VEERBAHADUR RAJPUT - Applicant(s)VersusSTATEOF GUJARAT - Respondent(s)=========================================Appearance :MRFEROZ H PATHAN forApplicant(s) : 1,MS CM SHAH, LD. ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR forRespondent(s) : 1,=========================================CORAM: HONOURABLEMR.JUSTICE Z.K.SAIYEDDate: 07/10/2011ORALORDERBywa...
Tag this Judgment!