Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: pondicherry university act 1985 section 18 other officers Court: punjab and haryana Page 3 of about 1,693 results (0.979 seconds)

Satya Parkash Mehta, Advocate Vs. Mela Ram

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : (1993)103PLR281

..... and requires it for his own occupation'. both these expressions have indeed different connotations and so cannot be termed similar. even the purpose of introducing of this act-punjab act no. 2 of 1985-is quite clear. it is intended to provide succour to the public servants who had retired or were going to retire within a specified period to recover ..... to jaw. in other words, it can interfere with the order if it is without jurisdiction or contrary to law and express provisions of the act as amended by the punjab act no. 2 of 1985 or where the order is perverse resulting in miscarriage of justice.'10. the apex court in cast' reported as hari shankar v. rao girdhari lal ..... no choice but to accede to his request and ' pass an order of eviction against the respondent. according to the counsel this beneficial provision was inserted vide punjab act no. ii of 1985 to give some relief to persons who had retired or about to retire within the stipulated period as mentioned in section 13-a of the .....

Punjab United Forge Ltd. Vs. Hindustan Hydraulics (P.) Ltd.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : [1992]75CompCas316(P& H); (1992)101PLR661

..... of the company which has been declared a sick unit under the sick industrial companies (special provisions) act, 1985. section 22 of the act has a non obstante clause and says that-'. . . notwithstanding anything contained in the companies act, 1956 (1 of 1956), or any other law or the memorandum and articles of association of the ..... the decree passed in their favour.2. parliament of india enacted the sick industrial companies (special provisions) act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as 'the act'), with the following objectives (see [1986] 59 comp cas (st.) 93) :'an act to make in the public interest, special provisions with a view to securing the timely detection of sick ..... the change in law, i.e., regarding the enactment of the sick industrial companies (special provisions) act, 1985, was brought to the notice of the appellate court. a reading of the objections and section 22 of the act (reproduced in the earlier part of the judgment) brings out the mandate of legislature. the executing court .....

Jagtar Singh Son of Maghar Singh. Vs. State of Punjab.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

..... before special court, barnala, for the charge under section 15 of the narcotic drugs and pshychotropic substances act, 1985 (in short 'the ndps act'). accused jagtar singh also faced the trial for the charge under section 25 of the arms act. accused paramjit singh, who was the owner of the truck allegedly involved in this case, was acquitted ..... that the recovery of material objects from the possession of the accused/appellants was established. therefore, there is a presumption under sections 35 and 54 of the ndps act with respect to the culpable mental state of the accused. the arrest of the accused at the spot cannot be doubted. minor discrepancies in the evidence ..... a copy thereof to his immediate official superior within 72 hours. apart from the non compliance of the mandatory provisions under section 42(2) of the ndps act, the conduct of pw1 in not reducing the secret information into writing and not passing on the secret information to his higher official, shakes the very foundation .....

Darshan Lal Vs. State of Haryana

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : 1997CriLJ2137

..... passed by the additional sessions judge, ambala whereby the appellant has been convicted for an offence under section 18 of the narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the act) and setneced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and to pay a fine of rs. 1 lac and in default of payment of fine to ..... which can extend to 20 years, rigorous imprisonment and a fine of rupees two lakhs or more. it is necessary, therefore, that courts dealingwith offences under the ndps act should be very careful to see that it is established to their satisfaction that the accused has been informed by the concerned officer that he had a right to ..... on receipt of the report of the chemical examiner and completing the investigating a charge-sheet was submitted to the court.3. a charge under section 18 of the act was framed against the appellant to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed a trial.4. in support of its case, prosecution examined as many as eleven witnesses .....

Krishan Lal Vs. State of Haryana

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : 1996CriLJ1401

sarojnei saksena, j.1. appellantaccused has assailed his conviction' under section 18 of the narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances act, 1985 (in short, the act) and sentence to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and a fine of rs. one lac; in default of payment of fine, to undergo further rigorous imprisonment ..... having any licence or permit. hence he was convicted and sentenced accordingly.6. appellant's learned counsel contended that in this case mandatory provisions of section 50 of the act were not adhered to and on this count alone the accused is entitled to acquittal. to buttress his contention, he has relied on chander pal v. the state ..... that even while discharging patrolling duty when a police officr makes a search of such contraband, he is duty bound to follow the provisions contained in section 50 of the act. the division bench has taken into consideration the judgments of the apex court delivered in ali mustaffa abdul rahman moosa v. state of kerala, 1994 (6) jt 326 .....

Jal Singh S/O. Khazan Singh Vs. State of Haryana

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : 1995CriLJ3444

..... saksena, j.1. accused-appellant has preferred this criminal appeal against his conviction and sentence under section 18 of the narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances act, 1985 (for short 'the act') recorded in sessions case no. 7 of 1986 by shri r.n. batra, additional sessions judge, bhiwani.2. the factual matrix of the ..... was not complied with, secondly sample was not examined by authorised chemical examiner as per rule 2(c) of the narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances rules, 1985 and lastly that independent witnesses were not joined, therefore, the statement of the police witnesses should not have been relied on. to support his first contention, ..... lawfully cultivated and produced opium, as contemplated under rule 22. it is further held that there is no provision in the said rules or in the act debarring chemical analysis of unlawfully possessed opium seized in connection with an offence elsewhere at any other laboratory in the country as would expedite investigation and trial .....

Som Nath S/O Ramji Dass Vs. State of Haryana

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : 1995CriLJ3322

..... 10-1986 of shri n. k. jain, sessions judge, narnaul, whereby he was convicted under section 18 of the narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances act. 1985 (hereinafter in short the 'act') and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for 10 years with a fine of rs. one lac, in default to further undergo r.i. for a ..... the act. there is flagrant violation of provisions of section 50, 55 and 57 of the act. these provisions are mandatory. due to non- compliance with these ..... , the trial court held the accused guilty under section 18 of the act. convicted and sentenced him as stated above.5. the appellant's learned counsel contended that the ease was initially registered under the opium act though in september 1985 this act came into force. hence the prosecution has not followed the mandatory provisions of .....

Satnam Singh Vs. State of Punjab

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : 1997CriLJ2067

..... dated 1-12-1995 passed by the additional sessions judge, amritsar whereby the appellant has been convicted under section 18 of the narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances act, 1985 (for short the act) and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and to pay a fine of rs. 1 lakh and in default of payment of fine to ..... receipt of the report of the chemical examiner and on completing the investigation a charge-sheet was submitted to the court.3. a charge under section 18 of the act was framed against the appellant which he denied and claimed trial. in support of its case, the prosecution examined three witnesses. inspector sube singh (pw 1) is ..... search of the bag purported to have been carried by the appellant on the carrier of his motorcycle. non-compliance with the provisions of section 50 of the act is admittedly fatal to the case of the prosecution.16. according to the prosecution case itself, arjan singh an independent public person was joined with the police party .....

Gurdev Kaur Vs. State of Haryana

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : 2002CriLJ3016

..... 2000 passed by the additional sessions juge, fatehabad convicting the appellant-accused, gurdev kaur, under section 18 of the narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as 'the act') and sentencing her to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period often years and a fine of rs. 1,00,000/-. in default of payment ..... the commission of offence in respect of narcotic drug or psychotropic substance in 'any building, conveyance or enclosed place'. the provisions of section 43 of the act which are applicable in the facts and circumstances of the case do not require that on receipt of any information received by the investigating officer, it ..... deposited with balwinder singh, moharrir head constable balwinder singh of the police station. the investigating officer also prepared the report under sections 55 and 57 of the act exs. ph and pk respectively. on analysis of the sample, the forensic science laboratory, madhuban in its report ex. pm found the sample to be opium .....

Jagan Nath Vs. State of Punjab

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : 1997CriLJ606

..... by the additional sessions judge, amritsar, whereby the appellant has been convicted for an offence under section 18 of the narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as 'the act') and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and to pay a fine of rs. 1,00,000/-, or in default of payment of ..... case. the respective arguments have been carefully considered.9. the first question which falls for decision is as to whether the provisions of section 50 of the act, which are admittedly mandatory in nature, were complied with before conducting the alleged search of the appellant. in the* first information report, carbon copy of which ..... offer that he could be searched either before a magistrate or a gazetted officer. therefore, the necessary conclusion is that the provisions of section 50 of the act were not complied with in this case before conducting the alleged search. this serious flaw in itself is fatal to the prosecution case.12. as regards .....