Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

KHEM KARAN versus UNION OF INDIA

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Khem Karan v. Union Of India - CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. 15791 of 2004 [2006] RD-AH 7535 (10 April 2006)

 

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

                                                                            Reserved

Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.   15791  of      2004

Khem Karan                     ...                       ..                       ...                     Applicant

                                         Vs.

Union of India (Narcotics Department, Bareilly                    ...                   Opp. Party

                                                                .......................

Hon. G.P. Srivastva, J.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

It is alleged that the applicant was granted licence for cultivation of opium by Narcotics Department for the year 2003-04. In the Measurement Book from 9..3.04 to 18.3.04 the produce has been shown as 10.100 kg. but when it was weighed by the concerned authority it was found only 5.430 kg. and adulterated from those the applicant has violated the terms of licence and committed offence under N.D.P.S. Act. The extract of Measurement Book is signed by the applicant and the lumberdar as required under Rules. The Measurement Book shows confirmed authenticity of the prosecution case. From Annexure-II of the counter affidavit it appears that only 5.430 kg. opium was deposited by the applicant which was duly recorded in the Weightment Register and the endorsement was made by the Inspector concerned.

Learned counsel for the applicant has placed reliance in Gajodhar Vs. Union of India 2005 (1) JIC 682 (Alld.) (Lucknow Bench) which is distinguishable on facts. In my opinion the applicant does not deserve bail. The bail application is rejected.

Dt. 10.4.06

GNY


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.