Skip to main content

Posts

INDUSTRIAL HEMP LEGISILATION IN KARNATAKA

The serial advent of international conventions over drug and its illicit trafficking pressured India to implement its provisions and objects at the federal level and hence The Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 was enacted. Section 14 of the said act provides special provision relating to cannabis for the purpose of industry and horticulture. Recently the Government of Uttarakhand providing licenses for farmers to grow hemp or cannabis for industrial purposes under the above provision of law. Prior to the enactment of NDPS Act, 1985, the majority of states in India have adopted the policy of prohibition and excise over the intoxicating drugs and intoxicating drinks. The policy of prohibition and Excise in Karnataka is governed by the Karnataka Prohibition Act, 1961 and The Karnataka Excise Act, 1965 respectively. The prohibition act imposes prohibition over intoxicating drinks and drugs and formulate exceptions to certain reasonable other purposes such as sc
Recent posts

Supreme court on natural justice

      Maneka Gandhi vs Union Of India 1978 AIR 597, 1978 SCR (2) 621 ; There can be no distinction between a quasi-judicial function and an administrative function for the purpose of principles of natural justice. The aim of both administrative inquiry as well as the quasi-judicial inquiry is to arrive at a just decision and if a rule of natural justice is calculated to secure justice or to put it 'negatively, to prevent miscarriage of justice, it is difficult to see why it should be applicable to quasi- judicial inquiry and not to administrative inquiry. It must logically apply to both. It cannot be said that the requirements of fair play in action is any the less in an administrative inquiry than in a quasi-judicial one. Sometimes an unjust decision in an administrative inquiry may have far more serious consequences than a decision in a quasi-judicial inquiry and hence rules of natural justice must apply, equally in an administrative inquiry which entails civil consequences

Legal maxim

                     A Legal Maxim is an established principle or proposition. The Latin term, apparently a variant on maxi-ma, is not to be found in Roman law with any meaning exactly analogous to that of a legal maxim in the Medieval or modern sense of the word, but the treatises of many of the Roman jurists on Regular definitions, and Sententiae juris are, in some measure, collections of maxims. Most of the Latin maxims developed in the Medieval era in European countries that used Latin as their language for law and courts. A A mensa et thoro - From bed and board. A vinculo matrimonii - From the bond of matrimony. Ab extra - From outside. Ab initio - From the beginning. Absoluta sententia expositore non indiget - An absolute judgment needs no expositor. Abundans cautela non nocet - Abundant caution does no harm. Accessorium non ducit sed sequitur suum principale - An accessory does not draw, but follows its principal. Accessorius sequitur - One who is an acc