Uttaranchal Court May 2002 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Man Mohan Alias Bhuri Vs. State of Uttaranchal
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: May-15-2002
Reported in: 2003CriLJ4506
Irshad Hussain, J.1. The appellant was tried in the Court of Special/Sessions Judge, Pauri Garhwal for an offence punishable under Sections 8/20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) on the allegation that he was found in possession of 80 grams of Charas without licence at about 7.00 p.m. on 14-11-1999 near Siddh Bali Mandir within the local limits of Police Station Kotdwar district Pauri Garhwal.2. In order to prove its case, prosecution relied upon the evidence of five witnesses, out of which Sub-Inspector Nain Singh Ramola (P.W. 1), the complainant of the case proved the factum of the search of the person of the appellant and the recovery of 80 grams of Charas. He also proved that the recovery and arrest was effected vide Memo. (Ext. Ka. 1). At the time of the arrest and recovery Constable Sompal Singh (P.W. 2) was also present and he corroborated the evidence of P.W. 1. They both have also Identified the seized contraband (...
Charan Singh Chauhan Vs. Sessions Judge and anr.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: May-14-2002
Reported in: 2003CriLJ4165
ORDERIrshad Hussain, J.1. Applicant preferred a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as Code) for quashing the order dated 6-7-2001 passed by C.J.M., Pauri Garhwal and also the judgment and order dated 24-1-2002 passed by Sessions Judge, Pauri Garhwal, whereby the earlier mentioned order of the C.J.M. was set aside.2. Heard Smt. Pushpa Joshi, learned applicant's counsel and Sri U.P.S. Negi, Miss. Vijai Laxmi Fartiyal, learned counsel for the opposite parties.3. At the out-set it need to be pointed out that order dated 6-7-2001 passed by C.J.M., Pauri Garhwal is in favour of the applicant and it appears that due to some confusion quashing of this order has been sought by the applicant. In view of it, the propriety and legality of the other judgment and order dated 24-1-2002 of the Sessions Judge, Pauri Garhwal remain to be considered for the purpose of the relief claimed through the present application.4. Applicant had filed a written com...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›