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

2013 Supreme(MP) 275

A.K.Shrivastava
Harishankar – Appellant
Versus
State of M. P. – Respondent


Advocates:
Imtiaz Hussain for applicants; Ramesh Kushwaha, Public Prosecutor for respondent/State.

ORDER

1. Feeling aggrieved by the order impugned dated 15.1.2003 passed by learned Second Additional Sessions Judge, Aastha, District Sehore in Sessions Trial No. 196/2012 framing charges punishable under sections 4B and 5 of the Explosive Substances Act, 1908 (for short, Act), this revision under section397 read with section 401 CrPC has been filed by the applicants.

2. As per the case of prosecution the explosive substance namely ‘Ammonium Nitrate’ was seized from the possession of the applicants on 17.3.2012 and since it is an explosive substance, therfore, the case was registered against applicants and a charge-sheet was submitted upon which learned trial Court framed charges punishable under sections 4B and 5 of the said Act. Learned counsel for the applicants has invited my attention to gazette notification of the Government of India dated 11.7.2012 wherein from the date of its publication, Ammonium Nitrate Rules, 2012 were enforced, hence according to learned counsel the charges under sections 4B and 5 of the said Act cannot be framed against the applicants, because on 17.3.2012 the rules which were existing, under those rules Ammonium Nitrate was not included. Hence, it has b








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