Search Results for "Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act"

470 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 470 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Grants Bail to NDPS Accused After 2 Years 11 Months Custody. High Court's Rejection Based on Co-Accused's Non-Surrender Set Aside as Each Accused's Case Must Be Considered on Its Own Merits Under Section 20(b)(ii)(C) of NDPS Act.

The appellant, Sebil Elanjimpally, was charged under Section 20(b)(ii)(C) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, for alleged com...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Upholds Conviction in NDPS Case but Reduces Sentence — Recovery of 13 Kg Charas from Dhaba Counter. Conscious possession established as appellant was managing the dhaba and contraband found below counter; sentence reduced from 15 to 10 years considering age and first offence.

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal of Jeet Ram against his conviction under Section 20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Acquits Four Convicts in NDPS Case Due to Non-Compliance with Sections 42 and 50 of NDPS Act, 1985. Procedural Violations in Search and Seizure Lead to Acquittal of Appellants Convicted Under Section 20(b) of NDPS Act.

The appellants, Pratap Bhimsingh Parera, Gangadhar Babaji Lenaka, Mrs. Savita Pratap Parera, and Mrs. Santoshi Santosh Pradhan, were convicted by the ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Acquits Accused in NDPS Case Due to Non-Compliance with Section 42(2) and Lack of Independent Witnesses. Conviction under Sections 8(c), 20(b)(ii)(c), and 29 of NDPS Act set aside as mandatory procedural safeguards were violated.

The appellant, Salim Jamshed Ali Shaikh @ Kanya, was convicted by the Special Judge (NDPS Act), Mumbai, in Special Case No.78 of 2010 for offences und...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Issues Interim Directions in Drunk Driving PIL Pending Appeal Against Acquittal of Actor. Court Notes Large Number of Recent Cases Under Section 185 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and Directs Interim Measures.

This Public Interest Litigation (PIL) arises from an incident on 28 November 2002 in Mumbai, where the fourth respondent, a popular Hindi film star, w...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Partially Allows Challenge to SAFEMA Forfeiture Order — Agricultural Land Acquired Prior to Detention Exempt from Forfeiture. Property acquired before the 'illegal' period under Section 2(2)(b) of SAFEMA cannot be forfeited; appellate authority's order partly confirmed.

The petitioner, Ranchhodbhai Bhagwanbhai Tandel (since deceased, through his legal heir Naresh Ranchhodbhai Tandel), filed a criminal writ petition un...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Acquits Accused in NDPS Case Due to Non-Compliance with Section 50 of NDPS Act, 1985. Failure to Inform Accused of Right to be Searched Before Gazetted Officer or Magistrate Renders Search Illegal and Conviction Unsustainable.

The appellant, a Nigerian national, was convicted by the Special Judge in NDPS Case No. 116 of 2000 for an offence under Section 8(c) punishable under...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses State Appeal in NDPS Case Due to Non-Compliance with Section 50 and Lack of Independent Witnesses. Failure to Inform Accused of Right to be Searched Before Gazetted Officer Renders Search Illegal Under Section 50 of NDPS Act, 1985.

The State of Maharashtra appealed against the judgment and order of the Additional Sessions Judge, Pune, dated 7th May 1987, which acquitted the respo...