REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

HAMDARD DAWAKHANA Appellant

V/S

UNION OF INDIA Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

EMPEROR V. SIBNATH BANERJI [REFERRED]
DWARKADAS SHRINIVAS V. SHOLAPUR SPINNING AND WEAVING CO. LID. [REFERRED 1954 SCR 674 (V 41) : ,]
CHINTAMANRAO VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [REFERRED]
CHARANJIT LAL CHOWDHARY VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED]
RAM SINGH VS. STATE OF DELHI [REFERRED]
STATE OF BOMBAY VS. F N BALSARA [REFERRED]
KATHI RANING RAWAT VS. STATE OF SAURASHTRA [REFERRED]
POOVERJEE B BHARUCHA VS. EXCISE COMMISSIONER AND THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER AJMER [REFERRED]
BENGAL IMMUNITY COMPANY LIMITED VS. STATE OF BIHAR [REFERRED]
A S KRISHNA VS. STATE OF MADRAS [REFERRED]
SARDAR INDER SINGH SHRI DURGA PARSHAD DWARKA PRASAD AND OHTERS BANKS LAL BAHADUR GANGA SINGH KALU SINGH SURYA BHAGWAN SAHAI VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [REFERRED]
STATE OF BOMBAY VS. R M D CHI MARBAUGWALA ADVOCATE GENERAL OF MYSORE INTERVENER [REFERRED]
R M D CHAMARBAUGWALLA MIS SHARMA MAGAZINE A FIRM HIND SHABDA RACHANA HARIFAI SHRI CHAMAN LAL KHANNA BANNETT COLEMAN AND COMPANY LIMITED VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED]
EXPRESS NEWSPAPER PRIVATE LTD VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED]
RAM KRISHNA DALMIA SHRIYANS PRASAD JAIN JAI DAYAL DALMIA VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED]
KAVALAPPARA KOTTARATHIL KOCHUNNI ALIAS MOOPIL NAYAR RAVUNNIARATH UNNIMALU AMMA ALIAS DEVAKI AMMAL RAVUNNIARATH RAJAN MENON K C GOPALAN UNNI THATHUNNI NAIR P KOCHUNNI RAJA VS. STATE OF MADRAS [REFERRED]
MAHANT MOTI DAS MAHANT SHIA RAM DAS MAHANT NARAIN DAS MAHANT MAHABIR DAS MAHANT RAM KRISHNA DAS VS. S P SAHI THE STATE OF BIHAR THE PRESIDENT BIHAR STATE BOARD OF RELIGIOUS TRUSTS [REFERRED]
EMPEROR VS. BENOARI LAL SARMA [REFERRED]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These petitions under Art. 32 of the Constitution raise the question of the constitutionality of the Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act (Act XXI of 1954) hereinafter referred to as the Act. As the petitions raise a common question of law they may conveniently be disposed of by one judgment.

(2.) The allegation of the petitioners was that various actions had been taken against them by the respondents which violated their fundamental rights under Art. 19(1)(a) and Art. 19 (1)(f) and (g). They also challenged the Act because it contravened the provisions of Art. 14 and Arts. 21 and 31.

(3.) The Act passed on April 30, 1954 came into force on April 1, 1955 along with the rules made thereunder. As provided in its preamble it was

Click here to view full judgment.

HAMDARD DAWAKHANA KALIPADA DEB LAKSHMAN SHRIPATI LTPURE ALIAS LAKSHMAN SHRI PATI IMPORE A B CHOUDHRI Vs. UNION OF INDIA

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address