Search Results for "dangerous activities"

759 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 759 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Quashes NDPS Proceedings Against Petitioner for Lack of Evidence of Conscious Possession and Commercial Quantity. Court holds that mere presence in a vehicle with contraband does not constitute possession under Section 20(b)(ii)(A) of NDPS Act without proof of knowledge and control.

The petitioner, Mr. Kalam Narendra, filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Code of...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Allows Appeals in SAFEMA Forfeiture Case — Notice to Convict Not Mandatory When Property Held by Relatives. The Court held that proceedings against relatives under Section 6 of SAFEMA are independent and do not require prior notice to the convict.

The Supreme Court of India heard appeals against a Madras High Court judgment that had set aside forfeiture orders under the Smugglers and Foreign Exc...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Allows Accused's Appeal for Cloned Copy of Memory Card in Rape Case — Right to Fair Trial Prevails Over Victim's Privacy. Electronic Record Held to be 'Document' Under Evidence Act and IPC, Entitling Accused to Copy Under Section 207 CrPC.

The appellant, P. Gopalkrishnan @ Dileep, was arrayed as accused No. 8 in a case registered under various sections of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Successive Writ Petition Challenging Detention Order Under MPDA Act on Grounds of Res Judicata and Constructive Res Judicata. Fresh Grounds of Delay in Execution and Non-Application of Mind Held Not Maintainable as They Could Have Been Raised in Earlier Petition.

The petitioner, Rashid @ Jagga Shaukat Hussein Sayyed, filed a criminal writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging an or...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Habeas Corpus Petition Challenging Detention Under MPDA Act Due to Non-Supply of Verification Statements of In-Camera Witnesses. Failure to Furnish Copies of Verification Statements Violates Article 22(5) of Constitution and Section 8(b) of MPDA Act, Rendering Detention Invalid.

The petitioner, Rohidas @ Pintya Laxman Gupte, was detained under Section 3(2) of the Maharashtra Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Slumlords, Boo...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Quashes Detention Order Under MPDA Act Due to Unreasonable Delay in Considering Representation. Unexplained Delay of 25 Days in Deciding Representation Renders Detention Illegal Under Article 22(5) of Constitution.

The petitioner, Mr. Rizwan @ Tippu Sattar Pathan, challenged an order of detention dated 5th May 2014 passed under Section 3(2) of the Maharashtra Pre...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Quashes Detention Order Under MPDA Act for Non-Communication of Grounds in Language Known to Detenu — Violation of Article 22(5) of Constitution of India. Detenu Who Knew Only Urdu Was Served Grounds in English and Hindi, Rendering Representation Right Illusory.

The petitioner, Abubakar @ Bagla Rais Ansari, was detained under Section 3(2) of the Maharashtra Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Slumlords, Boot...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Quashes Preventive Detention Order Under MPDA Act Due to Discrepancy in Dates. Discrepancy between date of detention order (02/02/2012) and grounds of detention (03/02/2012) shows subjective satisfaction recorded after order, vitiating detention.

The petitioner, Iqbal Sikandar Pathan, was detained under Section 3(1) of the Maharashtra Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Slumlords, Bootleggers...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Petition Challenging Continued Detention Under MPDA Act Due to Non-Consideration of Representation. Failure of Detaining Authority to Consider Detenu's Representation Before State Government Approval Violates Article 22(5) of the Constitution.

The petitioner, Arif Amin Shaikh, was detained under Section 3(1) of the Maharashtra Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Slumlords, Bootleggers, Dru...