Showing : 51-60 of 1945 Results

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Year of decision: 2019
Details
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Section 20, 29-- Bail during pendency of appeal - Both the accused acquitted by trial Court - High Court affirmed acquittal of co-accused but convicted the appellant - Reasons which weighed with the trial Court while recording acquittal not dealt with by High Court - Bail during pendency of appeal granted...........
MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2019
Details
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, Section 138, 139, 20-- Dishonour of cheque - Other entries in cheque not filled by accused - Does not absolve accused from liability arising from the cheque - S.20 of the Act draws presumption in favour of holder of the cheque...........
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Year of decision: 2019
Details
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 121, 121A, 122, 34, Arms Act, 1959, Section 25, 27(1), 29(A), Telegraph Act, 1885, Section 20, Wireless Telegraphy Act, 1933, Section 6(1)(A)-- Offences u/ss 121, 121-A, 122, 34 IPC, 25, 27(1), 29(A) of Arms Act, S.20 of Telegraph Act and S.6(1)(A) of Wireless Telegraphy Act - Prosecution essentially relied upon confessional statement of accused recorded under provisions of TADA Act - Since accused cannot be proceeded for TADA offences..........
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2019
Details
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Section 20(b)(ii)(B)-- Recovery of 6 kg Ganja - Search and seizure - No details of autorikshaw in which goods were said to be under transportation given in information received by PW4 - It cannot be understood as to based on what suspicion, they stopped autorikshaw and enquired inmates therein - As such very initial act..........
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2019
Details
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Section 20(b)(ii)(B)-- Recovery of 6 kg Ganja - Merely because Panchas have not supported case of prosecution, evidence of official witnesses cannot be totally discarded, provided their evidence appears to be trustworthy...........
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2019
Details
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Section 20(b)(ii)(B)-- Recovery of 6 kg Ganja - Search and seizure - Panch witnesses totally turned hostile to prosecution case - Evidence of official witnesses cannot be relied upon, as narration of PW4 about stopping autorickshaw merely based on suspicion and evidence of PW1 read in entirely does not appears to be..........
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2019
Details
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Section 20(b)(ii)(B)-- Recovery of 6 kg Ganja - Where member of raiding team himself being recipient of complaint and also I.O, who conducted investigation and filed charge sheet, same creates serious suspicion in circumstances of case - Accused acquitted...........
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2019
Details
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Section 2(iii)(b), 20(b)(ii)(B)-- Recovery of 6 kg Ganja - PW1 and PW4 stated that they noticed ganja leaves in the bag that was in possession of accused - Even Panchnama nowhere mentions that it was flowering or fruiting tops or buds, on the contrary it shows that it were containing ganja leaves and seeds - Chemical Examiner's..........
ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2019
Details
Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987, Section 21, 20(4)-- Award of Lok Adalat - Challenged on ground of no, compliance of S.20(4) of the Act - Award cannot be set aside...........
MADRAS HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2019
Details
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, Section 4, 20-- Pronote - Suit pronote is having required ingredients as mentioned in S.4 of the Act - However, manner of writing and lack of evidence with regard to handing over signed paper to plaintiff has created doubt whether transaction alleged by plaintiff is in accordance with evidence given by PW2 - No..........

Showing : 51-60 of 1945 Results