Punjab And Haryana High Court · 2006
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 s. 482
- Insecticide Act, 1968 ss. 3(k)(i), 17, 18, 29, 33
Judgment
CORAM :- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL Present: Mr. Rakesh Verma, Advocate, for the petitioners. * * * The petitioners have filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing the complaint under Section 29 read with section 3 (k) (i), 17, 18 and 33 of the Insecticide Act, 1968 and Rules 10 and 27 (5) of the Insecticide Rules, 1971, summoning order dated
21.3.2006, passed by Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Amritsar and all the consequential proceedings arising therefrom qua the petitioners. After arguing for some time, counsel for the petitioners states that he does not want to press this petition at this stage, as the appeal filed by the petitioners against cancellation of the license is pending before the appropriate authority. Dismissed as not pressed. September 29, 2006 ( SATISH KUMAR MITTAL ) JUDGE
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482; Insecticide Act, 1968 — ss. 3(k)(i), 17, 18, 29, 33.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Punjab & Haryana High Court, on 29 Sep 2006. The bench was SATISH KUMAR MITTAL.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.