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

1990 Supreme(Pat) 286

S.N.JHA, INDU PRABHA SINGH
Santosh Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the petitioners: Navniti Pd. Singh.
For the State: P. B. Mathur

ORDER (By Court)

An amendment petition has been filed on behalf of the petitioners bringing some facts that during the pendency of the writ application confiscation proceeding was initiated, by the Collector, Vaishali, and an order, as contained in Annexure 4 to this amendment petition, was passed. Let it be kept on the record and be treated as part of the main application.

2. This application has been placed under the heading 'For Orders' at the instance of the petitioners.

3. Vide order dated 23.8.90 State Counsel was asked to seek instruction in the matter so that this petition might be disposed of at the admission stage itself but Mr. Mathur appearing on behalf of the State did not receive any instruction till date.

4. Prima facie it appears that the entire prosecution launched against the petitioners is illegal and without any legal foundation for the reasons stated hereinafter.

5. From the statements made in this petition it appears that one truck bearing no. BHQ 8235 loaded with 120 bags of rice was intercepted by the Officer-in-Charge, Bhagwanpur Police Station on 17.8.90 at about 5 p.m. and a seizure list was prepared as contained in Annexure I to this application. Thereafter a









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