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

2002 Supreme(Bom) 161

D.D.SINHA
Sunil Vasantrao Phulbande & another – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent


JUDGMENT - SINHA D.D., J.:---Heard Shri Patwardhan, learned Counsel for the applicants, and Shri Dhote, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the non-applicant.

2. The present criminal application is moved by the applicants under section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of regular bail for the offences punishable under sections 20, 22 and 25 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.

3. Shri Patwardhan, learned Counsel for the applicants, submits that the applicants are permanent residents of Ramtek, District Nagpur. The applicant No. 1 is dealing in business of travels and owns and possesses one Maruti Van bearing Registration No. MH-29/C-250. The applicant No. 2 is working as driver with the applicant No. 1. The Maruti Van owned by the applicant No. 1 was hired by one Rajesh Roy for the purposes of going to Andhra Pradesh for his work and the said vehicle was returning back on 23-6-2001. On that day, Police Officials of Pandharkawada Police Station, District Yavatmal received information that ganja was being transported in the said vehicle. The Police Officials made arrangement for search of the vehicle and during the course of search of the vehicle,




















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