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

2021 Supreme(Bom) 1224

MANISH PITALE
Sachin – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
Akshay Naik, Advocate, Sagar Ashirgade, Advocate

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

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