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

2002 Supreme(MP) 126

N.S.AZAD
Manoj Malviya – Appellant
Versus
State of M. P. – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Mukesh Pandey, S.K.GANGRADE,

Judgment

( 1. ) ARGUMENTS heard.

( 2. ) A perusal of certified copy of order dated 6-8-2001 passed by First Additional Sessions Judge, Chhindwara, in Criminal Revision No. 89/2001 filed by this petitioner, reveals that petitioners application under Section 457 of Cr. PC stood disallowed and rejected by Shri U. K. Shukla, J. M. F. C, Chhindwara on 28-4-2001, by order passed in Criminal Case No. 53/2001. It is also found disclosed on perusal of aforesaid order that this petitioner wanted to obtain on supurdagi, Auto No, MP 28-T/0540 belonging to him, which was seized in Criminal Case No. 104/2001 of Police Station, Chandameta for offence punishable under Section 34-A of the M. P. Excise Act. While disposing of Criminal Revision No. 89/2001, in rejection, it is observed by first Additional Sessions Judge, Chhindwara, that a total of 53,680 ml. liquor is seized from the aforesaid vehicle, and hence, as provided under Section 41, so also 47-A of the M. P. Excise Act, the Collector may order confiscation of the aforesaid vehicle.

( 3. ) IT is found repeatedly explained by this Court in Paramjeet Singh v. State of M. P,, reported in 1999 (1) MPWN 100 and Kailash v. State of M. P. , reported


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