Anonymous
04 April 2010 at 10:14
whether as per new amended cr p c sec 324 and 420 of i p c are compoundable?when it comes into force
Anonymous
04 April 2010 at 09:33
i am from south india. there are come NI cases against my firm in Mumbai and Delhi in JFMs there.
I am been issued warrant for the same. Can i change the cases to South India and if so what are the formalities
Parvez
04 April 2010 at 00:28
This is a case of failure of “Swiss Aqua” brand mineral water bottle sample(No.5538/ASR) taken by Chief Health Inspector of Northern Railway from pantry car of 2926 Up Paschim Express on 15Jun97 from Mr. Gulab Premanna ,Bill Issuer of Pantry car no.94192(CPT62).
As per the sample report of mineral water bottle “The sample was not found contaminated however was found not having properly labeled and therefore it was taken as “misbranded” (Batch/lot/code no of the product were not given).
In this case, Mr. Gulab Premanna, bill issuer and Mr. Shabbir Shaikh, CCTRI Dinning Car, Mumbai Central have been made first and second party while the firm M/s natural Food Products, Borivali (W) Mumbai (Supplier of Swiss Aqua brand mineral water) has been made third party.
The case has been filed in the court of Judicial magistrate, First class at Amritsar and since then hearing has been going on at a regular interval.
Unfortunately, the two staff of Western Railway, Mr. Shabbir Shaikh CCTRI/Dining Car & Gulab H Premana ,Bill Issuer have been implicated in the prosecution in case no.55/99 in the court of IMIC-Amritsar. It is pointed out that Mr. Shabbir Shaikh-CCTRI has been made party in the case being in charge of Dining Car at Mumbai Central though not traveling in the pantry car.
The two of the Western railway Staff have been implicated for none of their fault.Hon’ble Court had issued a Warrant against the employees.
Strictly speaking the case should have been registered against the manufacturer/s Natural Food Products, Borivali, Mumbai and Railway staff could have been witnesses, if required. The staffs so charged have undergone mental, physical and financial agony. The contract was discontinued in 1997-98 itself whereas the case was registered after 2 years.
As per section 186 of Indian Railways Act, 1989 “No Suit, Prosecution or other legal proceeding shall lie against the Central Government, any administration, a railway servant or any other person for anything which is in good faith done or intended to be done in pursuance of this Act or any rules or orders made there-under. This was completely ignored by the Hon’ble Court and warrants were issued.
Neither Mr. Shabbir Shaikh CCTRI/Dining Car nor Gulab H Premana ,Bill Issuer was guilty as Food and water is directly supplied in the sealed boxes from the store in the Train and there is no way that these staff can have a Quality Control.
Tenders are allotted to the contractors at a higher level by the Railway Administrative authority and staff is supposed to use the material supplied by the contractor which the staff did in a good faith. It is a Contractor/Supplier responsibility to ensure that material supplied is as per the terms and condition set by the Railway.
It is also pointed out that no sanction of Western railway was taken or proper advice was given by Northern Railway at any stage to prosecute the staff.
My Father (Mr. Shabbir Shaikh) is about to retire in April-10 and suffering from Hypertension and Diabetes. It is very inconvenient for him to travel all the way from Mumbai to Amritsar on all dates for which he is not at all responsible.
The case is going on for the last 10 years and he is required to be present on all hearings. It is clearly a harassment and injustice for the last 10 years. I request your help to get him out of this trouble.
Thanking You,
Yours truly,
Parvez Shaikh
Anonymous
03 April 2010 at 20:31
I ma ben convicted by a lower court in mumbai and am planning to proceed for appeal. can i shift the case to south india since i reside there.moreover in the lower court in mumbai, its findinngs seems to be biased and dint mention anything which i produced to rebut the case.the complainnats cause was fake and i such i fear of some foul plays also. can anyone suggest me whether i can shift the case even thro supreme court
Advocate Neha Kalra
03 April 2010 at 20:17
v all really know where d police in india fail or the reasons behind the failure of the police in india, but do v really bother to know the causes due to which the police in india fai. d prominent causes are lack of modernization, training facilities, criminalization of politics, no or poor public support, corruption, less strength of police etc. these factors are not the complete list of factors which create problems for the police but this is just an illustrative list.
looking forward to d valuable suggestions of my colleagues on this subject
vijeta
03 April 2010 at 19:51
if a person is convicted of culpable homicide he is liable to be punished under which section of I. P .C ?
THANKS
Anonymous
03 April 2010 at 19:05
one of my relative did not appear in court in case of nagotiable instrument act 138 since 2005 after getting bail now he has come to know that he is declared proclaimed offender (not confirmed) pl suggest way our he is ready for compromise and he is ready to appear in court pl tell me how he can get bail
Chetan
03 April 2010 at 15:38
I had lodged the police report about the pressure horn used by the trucks alongwith their No but the police did nt take any action till today.
what shall i do wheher I approach to the Polluion Control board....
(I am in Maharashtra)
Pls provide which act will help me to stop the their acts.
Anonymous
03 April 2010 at 13:50
Sir,
I had an ugly incident wherein I was hit by a patient attender in the hospital when I was on duty in 2008. At that time i filed a police complaint and a case was registered under section 353 and 506IPC.
Now I have got a court summon asking me to appear on 9th april, which I wont be able to do b'cos of some reason. I havnt taken the delivery of the summon yet. The policeman from the concerned PS has called me up asking me to take the summon. When I told its not possible for me to appear. He told me to give it in the writing specifying the reason why I wont be able to do it. So is it the best way to handle the situation Please advice.
© 2026 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
NDPS ACT
I am appearing for the accused in a narcotic case and it is posted for final hearing.
Facts of the case is as follows :
Please guide me .
Offence u/s 20 (b) NDPS ACT.
ALLEGATION :-
Accused was found carrying 36 gms of ganja, in a plastic carry bag and he was arrested in a public place, on a casual search by the excice officials. ( no prior information).
Prosecution has examined 5 witnesses, and marked 6 documents.
Pw1 and pw4 - arresting officers
Pw2 and pw3- independent witnesses, ( not supported prosecution story ) but they were cross-examined by the prosecutor, without declaring hostile. is it permissible ?
Pw5 – investigation officer
Documents :-
P1 – seizure mahassr
P2 –arrest memo
P3-consent letter u/s 50 ndps by accused , to be searched by the arresting officers themselves( stating that there is no need of magistrate or gazette officers)
P4-occurance rport
P5-property list
P6-chemical analysis report
P7-inspection memo
M.O WAS NOT PRODUCED BEFORE THE COURT, NOR MARKED.
BUT, THE PROPERTY LIST SHOWS THAT IT WAS SENT TO THE COURT, AND THE COURT HAS RECEIVED IT ON THE SAME DAY…..WHETHER ACCUSED IS ENTITLED TO THE BENEFIT IN THIS REGARD ?
Grounds, I believe worth noting are :-
NO M.O WAS MARKED
INDEPENDENT WITNESSES ARE NOT OF THE LOCALITY
INDEPENDENT WITNESSES, NOT SUPPORTED THE PROSECUTION STORY
NO ENDORCEMENT IN THE ARREST MEMO , THAT ARREST OF THE ACCUSED WAS INFORMED TO HIS RELATIVES, BUT IT IS THERE IN THE P7 INSPECTION MEMO
PW 1 AND 4 SAYS THAT THERE IS NO COLUMN IN P2 FOR THAT. THAT’S WHY A SPECIAL P7 WAS PREPARED. BUT, AS PER DK BASU V/S UNION OF INDIA, IS IT NOT MANDATORY, TO INCLUDE IT , IN THE ARREST MEMO , ITSELF ?
NO REPORT U/S 57 IS MARKED. BUT SIMPLY STATED IN THE MAHASSAR THAT AFTER COMPLYING SEC 57, PROPERTY AND MAHASSAR WERE SENT TO COURT. IS IT SUFFICIENT ?
NO FOREWARDING NOTE WAS MARKED.BUT, ANALYST REPORT IS MARKED . IS IT SUFFICIENT ?
I am told that in NDPS CASES, there a lot of citations that before conducting search of an accused. The arresting officers has to offer their personal search to the accused, to avoid implanting of contraband articles.please give me any one of such citations .
Accused has signed in p3 consent letter. But, but p2 arrest memo bears accused “s thumb impression , not signature ! its legal consequence ?
Is sec 50 mandatory in cases or consent letter from accused , while in custody is sufficient ?
Ref : 2002(2)KLT 211 (SC)
PLEASE GIVE MAXIMUM CITATIONS FOR THE ABOVE GROUNDS .
RESPECTFULLY,
SD/-
SALILKUMAR.P
ADVOCATE
THALASSERY
09447536929
advocatesalil@gmail.com