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

1990 Supreme(All) 853

G.D.DUBEY
RAJ BAHADUR – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Anup Ghosh

G. D. DUBEY, J.

( 1 ) THIS is an application for bail.

( 2 ) ON a search of the applicant 5 gm. of brown sugar was recovered. The applicant has been arrested in connection with an offence punishable under Sections 17/18, N. D. P. S. Act (hereinafter referred to as Act ).

( 3 ) IT has been argued that the search was not in accordance with Section 51 of the Act. It was also urged that public witnesses were not summoned to witness the search and recovery. Lastly, it was urged that Section 37 of the Act is not applicable to the High Court. Therefore, the High Court can look into the matter from its own angle.

( 4 ) I have heard the learned A. G. A. also. He has raised the preliminary objection that the Union of India should be also made a party to this case because the Union of India has a cell to control the menace of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic substances.

( 5 ) IN reply to the above objection the learned counsel for the applicant has urged that the sole purpose of making the State Government or Union of India as a party to the petition is only to give an opportunity to the State Government or Union of India to oppose the application if they so like. In this case the investigation














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