MANISH PITALE
Sachin – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Manish Pitale,J. - Hearing was conducted through Video Conferencing and the learned counsel agreed that the audio and visual quality was proper.
2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally with the consent of the learned counsel for the rival parties.
3. The petitioner has invoked the principles of nemo debet bis vexari (no man shall be put twice in peril for the same offence) and autrefois acquit (the person has been acquitted on a same charge on which he is being prosecuted), embodied in Section 300 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC), in order to demonstrate that the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Buldhana in the present case has erred in passing the impugned order.
4. On 27/01/2014, the Food Safety Officer, Buldhana submitted a complaint before the police alleging that banned substance i.e. Gutkha and other such material was found stored in Om Shanti Pan Center at Malkapur, run by the petitioner. On this basis, First Information Report (FIR) stood registered against the petitioner for alleged offences under Sections 188, 273 and 328 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), as also Section 59(iii) of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 (hereinafter ref
Bhanu Kumar Jain vs. Archana Kumar
Kanhiya Lal Omar vs. R.K. Trivedi
Manipur Administration, Manipur vs. Thokchom, Bira Singh
Piara Singh vs. State of Punjab
Ravinder Singh vs. State of Haryana
Ravinder Singh vs. Sukhbir Singh
State of A.P. vs. Kokkiliagada Meerayya
State of Maharashtra And Another vs. Sayyed Hassan Sayyed Subhan
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.