Search Results for "section 13(2)"

1527 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 1527 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses State Appeal Against Acquittal in Food Adulteration Case Due to Non-Compliance with Section 13(2) of Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954. Failure to Supply Public Analyst Report to Accused Deprived Him of Valuable Right to Get Sample Tested by Central Food Laboratory.

The State of Maharashtra, through the Food Inspector, filed an appeal against the acquittal of the respondents (accused) by the Judicial Magistrate, F...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Upholds Acquittal in Food Adulteration Case Due to Denial of Right to Re-Analysis. Accused Acquitted as Sample Became Unfit for Analysis Under Section 13(2) of Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954.

The State of Maharashtra filed three appeals against the acquittal of the accused Harishchandra Sadhuram Agarwal, a vendor and proprietor of a kirana ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Upholds DRAT Order Requiring 25% Pre-deposit for Waiver of Appeal Under SARFAESI Act. Legal Heirs of Guarantor Must Deposit 25% of Section 13(2) Notice Amount as Condition for Hearing Appeal on Merits.

The petitioners, Smt. Julie Amitabh Parekh and others, who are the legal heirs of the deceased guarantor Amitabh Arun Parekh, filed a writ petition ch...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Acquits Accused in Food Adulteration Case for Non-Compliance of Mandatory Notice Under Section 13(2) of Prevention of Food Adulteration Act. Failure to Serve Notice to Accused for Right to Get Sample Examined by Central Laboratory Vitiates Prosecution.

The case involves a criminal revision filed by Rajaram and Nandlal Kanekar, vendors and proprietor of M/s Kumar Masala Gruha Udyog, against their conv...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Quashes Prosecution Against Directors in Food Adulteration Case Due to Inordinate Delay Depriving Right to Reanalysis. Delay of 35 months in filing complaint violated Section 13(2) of Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, rendering trial futile.

The applicants, who were directors of M/s. Bunge Agri Business India Ltd., filed an application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging Termination of Developer Appointment in Slum Rehabilitation Scheme. Petitioner's failure to obtain 70% slum dweller consent and submit documents within stipulated time justified termination under Section 13(2) of Maharashtra Slum Areas Act, 1971.

The petitioner, Surjit Singh Arora, sole proprietor of M/s. Sukhamani Construction, was appointed as developer for a slum rehabilitation scheme under ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Hears Appeal Against Conviction Under Prevention of Corruption Act for Alleged Bribery. Accused Program Executive Convicted Under Sections 7 and 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) for Demanding and Accepting Bribe of Rs.20,000.

The appeal before the High Court of Karnataka arose from the conviction of the appellant, a former Program Executive at Doordarshan Kendra, Bangalore,...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Dismisses Appeal and Upholds Conviction Under Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 for Selling Adulterated Sweets. Accused's Right to Cross-Examine Public Analyst Recognized but Request Rejected as Vexatious and Without Merit.

The Supreme Court heard an appeal by Ram Dayal, a sweetmeat seller, against his conviction under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 for sel...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Quashes Fresh Detention Order Under Preventive Detention Act as Violative of Section 13(2) — Fresh Facts Must Arise After Expiry. Additional Ground of Maintaining Links While in Custody Did Not Constitute Fresh Facts After Expiry of Previous Detention Order.

The case involved a habeas corpus petition under Article 32 of the Constitution challenging the detention of Kshetra Gogoi under the Preventive Detent...