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

2006 Supreme(Pat) 1108

NAVANITI PRASAD SINGH
Manish Gai – Appellant
Versus
State Of Bihar – Respondent


Judgment

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P.

2. By these applications orders dated 29-5-2006 passed by Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Patna, in Case No. 11(M) of 2006 and Case No. 46(M) of 2006, refusing the privilege u/s. 205, Cr.P.C., has been challenged.

3. The petitioner is the Managing Direetor of M/s. Ajay Food Products, Katni, Private Limited Company incorporated under the provision of Companies Act, 1956. He resides at Katni in the State of Madhya Pradesh from where he conducts the business on behalf of the company. Certain food items were found allegedly adulterated for which a prosecution was instituted for violation of the provisions of Prevention of Food Adulteration Act. The petitioner on coming to know of the proceedings filed an application before the trial Court for exemption from appearingiin person in terms of Sec. 205, Cr. P.C. The ground for filing such an application was that the petitioner is a busy businessman residing at Katni in the State of Madhya Pradesh and it will cause him undue harassment to physically appear on each and every date in the trial Court. He undertook to appear as and when Court would order for his personal












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