Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P. G. Ajithkumar, J
MOHAMMED ALI P.K – Appellant
Versus
THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY SAFEMA AND NDPS ACT – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. the legal effect of the freezing order is contingent upon timely confirmation. (Para 2) |
| 2. consequential actions regarding the freezing order were not taken. (Para 3) |
JUDGMENT
These two Writ Petitions (Crl) are connected and therefore, I am disposing of these two Writ Petitions by a common judgment.
The prayers in these Writ Petitions are extracted hereunder:
W.P Crl No.28468 of 2024 i. declare that Exhibit.P1 freezing order has no force of law and have no effect and is ceased to have effect as per section 68F (2) of the NDPS Act. ii. issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ directing the 3rd and 4th respondents to remove the petitioner's vehicles bearing reg. no.s KL 50 7070 (Innova) and KL 52 G 007 (Nissan Terrano) from the blacklist.
iii. grant such other reliefs as this Hon'ble Court may deem just and proper in the interest of justice, including costs. "
[SIC]
W.P Crl No.28393 of 2024 i. declare that Exhibit.P1 freezing order has no force of law and has no effect and ceased to have effect as per section 68F(2) of NDPS Act.
ii. issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ or order or declare directing the 4th respondent to remove the entries made by him
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
