Art. 19

Supreme Court e@Journal

www.PLRonline.in

Constitution of India, Art. 19(1)(d), (e) and (g) - Now the question arises can the State, where the migrants start residing, although may be poor and weaker sections of the society, can be burdened with all liabilities qua their dignified living, for affording opportunity of employment and their well being? - This is a larger issue which is required to be examined at the national level and by the parliamentarians and legislatures before framing appropriate policy and law - States have primary responsibility for their own domiciles - Inter-state Migrant Workmen (Regulation of Employment and Conditions of Service) Act, 1979 (30 of 1979). (183) PLR
Constitution of India, Art. 19(1)(g) - Insecticides Act, 1968 (of 1965) S. 5(1) - Committee if in the course of its function, it spells out the manner of scrutinizing the chemical formulae or assessing efficacy or safety, then it can be taken as competent to lay down condition in the manner which clause 5 provides - The procedural regulation cannot extend to restriction of applications that can be given by a insecticides manufacturer - It would literally fetter the rights of manufacturers and traders which are guaranteed under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution. (180) PLR
Constitution of India, Art. 20(2) - Sea Customs Act Exoneration in related adjudication proceedings and the effect thereof on criminal proceedings - Plea that the finding of the Collector of Customs that the accused are not proved to be guilty operated as estoppel in the criminal case against the accused - Adjudicating proceedings were initiated pursuant to the show cause notice and Order was passed by the Additional Commissioner of Customs imposing penalty on the accused - Commissioner of Customs (Appeal) set aside the penalty - Petition under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code filed seeking quashing - Exoneration of the respondent in the adjudication proceedings was the basis for petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Accused was declared proclaimed offender - Accused was declared a proclaimed offender and had not participated in any of the proceedings personally - In the circumstances no weightage could be given to copies of the passport submitted in support of the assertion that he had not visited India - Statement of VS did allege the involvement of the respondent - In law, if such statement is otherwise admissible and reliable, conviction can lawfully rest on such material Quashing order passed by High Court set aside. (2016)3 PLRSC 359