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

2003 Supreme(Guj) 139

A.M.KAPADIA, H.H.MEHTA
SAJJAN SING @ RAJU JAGDISHSINH PAWAR – Appellant
Versus
STATE – Respondent


Advocates Appeared: B.R.Gajjar, Rajesh M.Agrawal

H. H. MEHTA, J.

( 1 ) THE appellant [accused No. 1] has, by filing this Criminal Appeal under Section 374 (2) of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 [for short "cr. P. C. "] read with Section 36-B of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 [for the short "n. D. P. S. Act"], challenged the correctness, legality and validity of the judgment Ex. 46, rendered by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ahmedabad City, City Civil and Sessions Court, Ahmedabad [for short "the learned Judge of the trial Court"], who presided over the Special Court constituted under Section 36 of the N. D. P. S. Act, on 22. 09. 1997 in Sessions Case No. 313 of 1996, by which the appellant has been convicted under Section 235 (2) of Cr. P. C. of the offences punishable under Sections 17 and 18 of the N. D. P. S. Act and is sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment of 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000,00/-- and in default of fine to undergo further rigorous imprisonment of one year.

( 2 ) THE facts leading to this present Criminal Appeal, as per the complaint Ex. 29 lodged against the appellant in a nutshell are as follows :-2. 1 on or about 25. 09. 1996, the complainant Shri P. M. Jadav, Poli















































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