SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2001 Supreme(Bom) 257

VISHNU SAHAI, UPASANI PRATIBHA, S.S.PARKAR
Jayantilal Modi & others – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent


JUDGMENT - VISHNU SAHAI, J.:---On 14th July, 2000, while S.A. Bobde, J., was hearing Criminal Appeal Nos. 622 of 1994, 643 of 1994, 649 of 1994 and 82 of 1995, two conflicting decisions of this Court were cited before his Lordships; (Longuram Tariram Thakur v. The State of Maharashtra)1, 2000(Supp.) Bom.C.R. 128 : 2000 All Maharashtra Reporter (Criminal) 542 wherein this Court had taken the view that since in pursuance of prior information the accused were found in possession of charas at the S.T. stand, Pune, which was a public place, as contemplated by section 43 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotrophic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to by us as the N.D.P.S. Act) it was not necessary to comply with the provisions of section 42 of the N.D.P.S. Act in terms that the information had to be recorded in writing and its copy sent forthwith to the official superior and (Bindarsingh v. State of Maharashtra)2, 1999(1) Mh.L.J. 643 wherein it was laid down that even if the information pertained recovery of a narcotic substance under the N.D.P.S. Act was in relation to a public place, it was obligatory to comply with section 42 of the N.D.P.S. Act and to record the information in w








































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top