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

1982 Supreme(Raj) 163

G.M.LODHA
Chhagan Lal – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
N.L. Tibrewal, for Petitioner.

G.M. LODHA, J. Protective umbrella for preventing punitive punishment under Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, by plea of food stuffs meant for animals, whether genuine or result of ingenuity of human intelligence to exploit animals and human-beings together, is the pivot of legal debate in these two criminal prosecutions.

2. Prevention of prosecutions and implementation and enforcement of Prevention of Food Adulteration Act by vested interests, who do trafficking in human life for minting money, whether should be prevented by exploding such defences of ingenuity, trickery, is another facet of the present prosecutions, where the same petitioner is facing three prosecutions, for adulteration in three different varieties of food stuffs, on the same shop, as alleged by Mr. Tibrewal.

3. Whether man who is termed as "most intelligent animal" by some philosophers, should be allowed to exploit animals silence and helplessness of non-contesting, non-protesting and non-speaking, by taking defence in their name, is yet another new dimension of the novel defences, a dimension on which I would restrain myself from divulging and elucidating, any more as a Judge.

4. Honey for Scorpean bite treatm

























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