Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Case Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Acts
  • sec. 11 of the Opium Act
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Case Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Acts
  • sec. 11 of the Opium Act

    Shaikh Abdul Rahaman v. The King-Emperor Opposite Party.

    This was a rule calling upon the Chief Presidency Magistrate to show cause why the order, confiscating the boat, in this petition mentioned, should not be set aside on the ground that the said order was made without giving the owner of the boat an opportunity of being heard.

    The ground on which the rule was issued is quite sufficient to set the order aside but we would further point out that sec. 11 of the Opium Act does not seem to contemplate that every receptacle in the nature of a ship or a house or a carriage in which a small quantity of opium may happen to be found is liable to confiscation the liability arises from the owner of such conveyance using the conveyance for the purpose of transporting opium. No one can be liable because his servant made use of his private carriage as a depository for his private stock of opium. There is therefore no occasion to call upon the owner to show cause.

    The rule is made absolute, the order is set aside and the boat will be restored to its owner.

    B.C
    Rule made absolute.

    Use AI to get other relevant cases.

    Comments

    Shaikh Abdul Rahaman v. The King-Emperor Opposite Party.
    (Aug 19, 1910)