Lawyer In Chandigarh Things To Know Before You Buy

There is no provision nor was any such provision pointed out to us by learned counsel for the parties prescribing the nature of the storage facility to be used for storage of the contraband substances. It also observed that on its finding aforesaid, the appellant had incurred the disqualification enacted in ss. In Lalu Prasad alias Lalu Prasad Yadav v. No doubt, the learned counsel relied upon the judgment of this Court in Nagendra Prasad v. - On the merits, the Advocates (click over here now) Tribunal held that of the grounds put forward in the Election Petition, one and only one had been substantiated, and that was that the appellant had 'employed for payment, in connection with his election, 25 persons in addition to the number of persons allowed under Rule 118 read along with Schedule VI thereto, and had thereby 211 committed the major corrupt practice mentioned in s.

Merely because partition by one of the coparceners under clauses (a) to (c) is a condition for a class of family members entitled to a share in the property, it does not apply to a case where class of Advocates (hop over to this site) family members entitled under clause 8(1)(d) since it stands altogether on a different footing and, therefore, partition is not a condition precedent for claiming a share by a class of family members enumerated in Section 8(1)(a) of the Act.

From the said decision, we think it appropriate to reproduce the following passage:- Independence of judiciary is the basic feature of the Constitution. But for the fact that 16-5-1954 and 17-5-1954 were holidays, the petition would have been time-barred. The Tribunal overruled this plea on the ground that under Rule 2(6) of the Election Rules, the General Clauses Act X of 1897 was applicable in interpreting them, and that under s. The Tribunal accordingly declared the election void under s.

Under these circumstances, the conclusion reached by the High Court Advocates; hop over to this site, that since it is by partition, not by survivorship, clause (d) of sub-section (1) of Section 8 does not get attracted, is not (sic) correct. All that Section 55 of the Act Advocates, hop over to this site, envisages is that the officer in charge of a Police Station shall take charge of and keep in safe custody the seized article pending orders of the Magistrate concerned. 1/89 has made specific provisions in regard to the same.

Even so the importance of adequate storage facilities for safe deposit and storage of the contraband material has Advocates (hop over to this site) been recognised by the Government inasmuch as Standing Order No. They must ensure that their working does not lead to creation of conflict between justice and jurisprudence. Against this decision, the appellant has preferred this appeal by special leave. State of Jharkhand[4], the Court, repelling the submission that because some of the distantly related members were in the midst of the Chief Minister, opined that from the said fact it cannot be presumed that the Presiding Judge would conclude against the appellant.

This Court therein has explained that the object of Section 8(1)(d) is to give a right to claim a share in the joint family property to all females referred to in clauses (a) to (c) thereof. According to the prosecution, the occurrence took place at about midnight of July 4, 1954, when Daya Ram was sleeping on a cot on a platform. Kempananjamma [1967] INSC 167; [AIR 1968 SC 209] which was also considered by the High Court in the impugned judgment.

It demands that a Judge who presides over the trial, the Public Prosecutor who presents the case on behalf of the State and the lawyer vis-à-vis amicus curiae who represents the accused must work together in harmony in the public interest of justice uninfluenced by the personality of the accused or those managing the affairs of the State. But that principle has no bearing to the facts in this case for the reason that the property held was not received by survivorship.

140(1)(a) and 140(2) of the Act. 9 comprising Section III supra at this stage for ready reference: Section III of the said Order deals with Receipt of Drugs in Godowns and Procedure which inter alia provides that all drugs shall invariably be stored in safes and vaults provided with double locking system and that the agencies of the Central and the State Governments may specifically designate their godowns for storage purposes and such godowns should be selected keeping in view their security angle, juxtaposition to courts etc.

A person whether he is a judicial officer or a Public Prosecutor or a lawyer defending the accused should always uphold the dignity of their high office with a full sense of responsibility and see that its value in no circumstance gets devalued. " The plea put forward by the appellant in his written statement based on Rule 119(a) was that whatever might have been the reason therefor, the fact was that the petition had not been filed "not later than fourteen days" from the publication of the return of the election expenses, which was on May 2, 1954, and that it was, therefore, not presented within the time prescribed.

We may usefully extract paras 3. "The petition was filed on l8-5-1954. The public interest demands that the trial should be conducted in a fair manner and the administration of justice would be fair and independent. 10 of that Act, the election petition was presented within the time allowed by Rule 119(a). ] (3) Where the woman entitled to any property under sub-section (1) dies before receiving it, the heirs of the woman shall be entitled to claim it from the person holding it for the time being: Near him were sleeping Gokul, Doongar and Jai Singh, while two women Ratto and Bhuri slept in a room to the north of the platform and adjoining it.

[(2) If any person fails to transfer any property as required by sub- section (1) within the time limit specified therefore, [or as required by Sub-section (3),] he shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than six months, but which may extend to two years or with fine [which shall not be less than five thousand rupees, but which may extend to ten thousand rupees] or with both.