Postal Regd.No.G/CHD/0068/09-11. Annual Subsc. (Four Vols.) Rs.1360/-
CRIMINAL COURT CASES
(Registered with Registrar of Newspapers for India, R.No.CHAEND/2002/5814) Reporting latest Criminal judgments of S.C. & All the High Courts of India
Altercations - High Court justified in altering conviction from S.302 to S.304-I IPC. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 023 (S.C.)
Bail - Interim bail pending hearing of a regular bail application can be granted. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 273 (Allahabad) (DB)
Corruption - Offence punishable u/s 12 of Prevention of Corruption Act - Sanction for prosecution is not required. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 365 (S.C.)
Corruption - Public servant - Sanction for prosecution granted by authority not competent - Conviction cannot be set aside if there was no failure of justice on account of error in order of sanction. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 226 (S.C.)
Corruption case - Public Servant - Sanctioning Authority need not be examined as a witness by the prosecution. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 134 (S.C.)
Demand of money for construction of house - Cannot be termed as demand of dowry. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 049 (P&H)
Dishonour of cheque - Court within whose jurisdiction the cheque was merely presented for realisation has no territorial jurisdiction to try the offence. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 314 (Bombay)
Dishonour of cheque - Memo of dishonour bearing official mark denoting reason of dishonour - Court is bound to presume that the cheque has been dishonoured for the reason stated in the memo. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 356 (Kerala)
Dishonour of cheque - Notice - Claim of double the amount of cheque - Complaint filed of cheque amount - Discrepancy of amount in notice does not disentitle the complainant to claim the amount of cheque. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 194 (Karnataka)
Dying declaration - Signatures or thumb impression of deceased not taken - Dying declaration cannot be rejected if it is true and voluntary. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 001 (S.C.)
Expression "likely to cause death" in S.326 IPC is attributable to the instrument which is used as weapon of offence and not to the "grievous hurt". 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 180 (Kerala)
Food article - Packed commodity - Name of State not mentioned - However, PIN Code given - Held, once the PIN Code is given the requirement of law stands satisfied - No offence made out - Accused acquitted. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 143 (P&H)
Fraudulently - By merely alleging or showing that a person acted fraudulently, it cannot be assumed that he committed an offence punishable under the Code or any other law, unless that fraudulent act is specified to be an offence under the Code or other law. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 008 (S.C.)
Further investigation - Can be ordered when prosecution applies - Magistrate cannot of his own order further investigation. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 081 (S.C.)
Further investigation - Right reserved in challan itself - Challan cannot be said to be incomplete. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 015 (Delhi)
Investigation - Courts normally ought not to interfere and guide the investigating agency as to in what manner the investigation has to proceed. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 329 (S.C.)
Magistrate u/s 156(3) Cr.P.C. is not required to examine the complainant on oath. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 283 (Allahabad)
Medical negligence - Transfusion of mismatched blood - It is medical negligence. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 277 (S.C.)
Order u/s 145(4) Cr.P.C. - Limitation for implementation of order is three years from the date of order. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 210 (S.C.)
Provision of S.6 Specific Relief Act has no application to a proceeding u/s 145 Cr.P.C. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 210 (S.C.)
Sale of property by a person who is not the owner thereof - It is purchaser and not the third party who can complain. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 008 (S.C.)
SCST - Non mention of caste of accused in FIR - Not a ground to quash proceedings - Accused whether belongs to scheduled caste or schedule tribe can be gone into when the matter is being investigated. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 182 (S.C.)
Second complaint - First complaint dismissed for failure to put in process fee - Second complaint is maintainable. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 266 (S.C.)
SUBJECT INDEX
Circumstantial evidence
Circumstantial evidence - Law as to - (1) the circumstances from which the conclusion of guilt is to be drawn should be fully established. The circumstances concerned 'must' or 'should' and not 'may be' established; (2) the facts so established should be consistent only with the hypothesis of the guilt of the accused, that is to say, they should not be explainable on any other hypothesis except that the accused is guilty; (3) the circumstances should be of a conclusive nature and tendency; (4) they should exclude every possible hypothesis except the one to be proved; and (5) there must be a chain of evidence so complete as not to leave any reasonable ground for the conclusion consistent with the innocence of the accused and must show that in all human probability the act must have been done by the accused. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 066 (S.C.)
Constitution of India, 1950
Constitution of India, 1950, Art.136 - Infirmities in the judgment of Courts below - Supreme Court can interfere. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 113 (S.C.)
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Ss.2(h), 482 - Investigation - It is statutory duty of police to investigate into the crime - Courts normally ought not to interfere and guide the investigating agency as to in what manner the investigation has to proceed. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 329 (S.C.)
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Ss.97, 98 & 171 - Nari Niketan - Major woman - No adult woman can be compelled to stay in Nari Niketan - Petitioner set at liberty to go where she pleases - Police protection also provided to drop the petitioner at the place where she has expressed her desire to be escorted. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 270 (Allahabad)
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.125 - Maintenance - Children - Maintenance granted to one son and two daughters - In the meantime children became major - Direction had been issued to recover the amount of maintenance only for the period prior to the sons attaining majority and the daughters getting married - No interference in the impugned order warranted. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 303 (S.C.)
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.125(3), Limitation Act, 1963, S.15 - Maintenance - Execution - Limitation - One year - Limitation for filing application for execution is to be computed upon excluding the period during which the order of stay was operating. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 303 (S.C.)
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.145, Specific Relief Act, 1963, S.6 - Provision of S.6 Specific Relief Act has no application to a proceeding u/s 145 Cr.P.C. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 210 (S.C.)
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.145(4), Limitation Act, 1963, Art.137 - Order u/s 145(4) Cr.P.C. - Limitation - Held, limitation for making an application for implementation of order passed u/s 145(4) Cr.P.C. is three years from the date of order. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 210 (S.C.)
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.145(4) Proviso - Magistrate when proceeds under the proviso to sub-section (4), he may restore possession to the party forcibly and wrongfully dispossessed. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 210 (S.C.)
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.154 - FIR - Information disclosing a cognizable offence - Officer-in-charge of a police station is under an obligation to register a case and then to proceed with the investigation - Refusal to register is violation of a statutory duty. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 283 (Allahabad)
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.154 - FIR - It is open to a police officer to make preliminary enquiries before registering an offence and making a full scale investigation into it. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 344 (S.C.)
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.156(3) - Magistrate u/s 156(3) Cr.P.C. is not required to examine the complainant on oath since he has not taken cognizance of any offence therein - Investigation in a matter of a crime is the prime responsibility of the police. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 283 (Allahabad) 30 3
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.156(3) - Application u/s 156(3) Cr.P.C. - cognizable offence disclosed - When cognizable offence is disclosed it is duty of concerned Court to order for registration and investigation of the offence. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 283 (Allahabad)
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.156(3) - Application u/s 156(3) Cr.P.C. - Medical negligence - At the stage of S.156(3) Cr.P.C. Magistrate has to look whether any cognizable offence is disclosed or not for the purpose of directing the police to register the FIR - If a cognizable offence is disclosed, Magistrate is legally bound to direct registration of an FIR - At this stage, appreciation of facts have not to be done. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 299 (Allahabad)
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.156(3) - At the stage of S.156(3) Cr.P.C. accused has no right to be heard nor he can challenge an order before FIR is registered against him - Law confers a right of hearing on the victim at that stage of pre-registration of FIR whereas no such right is conferred on the accused at that stage. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 299 (Allahabad)
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.156(3) - Magistrate has discretionary power u/s 156(3) Cr.P.C. - Discretion vested in a judicial authority has to be exercised judiciously and not arbitrarily. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 283 (Allahabad)
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.156(3) - Medical negligence - Disclosure of commission of offence of causing death by culpable homicide - Serious allegations - Impugned order dismissing application set aside - Application allowed. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 299 (Allahabad)
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.162 - Cryptic information received by Police Officer - There was no possibility of recording of FIR at that stage - Police Officer went to the place of occurrence to verify the information and made the survey - FIR lodged thereafter - Held, such survey cannot be regarded as investigation - FIR is not hit by S.162 Cr.P.C. - Merely making some preliminary enquiry upon receipt of information from an anonymous source or a source of doubtful reliability for checking up the correctness of the information does not amount to collection of evidence and so cannot be regarded as investigation. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 344 (S.C.)
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.173 - Report u/s 173 Cr.P.C. stating that no offence is committed by persons named in complaint - Magistrate should not accept the report blindly and act mechanically - Magistrate should apply his mind and find out whether findings are based on material collected during investigation - Acceptance of report without applying mind - Impugned order set aside and matter remanded. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 188 (J&K)
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.173(2) and 173(8) - Further investigation - Can be ordered on an application of investigating authorities - Magistrate cannot of his own order further investigation. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 081 (S.C.)
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Ss.173(2), 173(8), 190 - Right reserved by Investigating Agency, in the ultimate paragraph of challan, to submit a report with respect to further investigation in due course - Cannot be held that an incomplete charge-sheet has been filed - No ground to quash order taking cognizance and summoning accused and to quash and set aside the challan. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 015 (Delhi)
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.173(8) - Further investigation - Permissible even after taking of cognizance by the Magistrate. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 081 (S.C.)
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.173(8) - Ten out of six accused discharged - De facto complainant submitting application for reinvestigation - Order passed for reinvestigation - Held, Magistrate has no jurisdiction to order reinvestigation on application of de facto complainant - Magistrate has no jurisdiction to entertain such an application by de facto complainant - Order quashed. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 081 (S.C.)
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.190 - Recall of process - Magistrate has no jurisdiction to recall his order issuing process in the absence of any power of review or inherent power which did not inhere in the subordinate Criminal Courts, but was available to the High Court u/s 482 Cr.P.C. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 081 (S.C.)
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Ss.200, 202, 203 - Second complaint - On same cause of action and between the same parties - Earlier complaint dismissed for failure to put in process fee for effecting service - Held, second complaint is maintainable. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 266 (S.C.)
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Ss.200, 203 - Recall of summoning order - Court has jurisdiction to recall order of cognizance on the application filed by accused who appears after service of summons. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 142 (Rajasthan)
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Ss.200 to 204 - Recall of summoning order - Summoning order recalled - Magistrate had jurisdiction to recall the summoning order in view of K.M.Mathew's case - Subsequently Supreme Court in Adalat Prasad case held that Court which passed the order of summoning had no jurisdiction to recall the same as there is no specific provision in Cr.P.C. for review and recalling the order by the same Court - Held, subsequent judgment by Supreme Court cannot be given retrospective effect - Order of recall upheld. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 093 (P&H)
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.228 - Charge - At the time of framing of charge, Court is not expected to go deep into the probative value of material on record - Court has to find out whether a prima facie case is made out against the accused. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 167 (Bombay)
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.235 - Quantum of punishment - Requires a balancing act between the competing views based on the reformative, the deterrent as well as the retributive theories of punishment - Sentence should neither be too harsh nor too lenient - In judging the adequacy of a sentence, the nature of the offence, the circumstances of its commission, the age and character of the offender, injury to individual or the society, effect of punishment on offender, are some amongst many other factors which should be ordinarily taken in to consideration by the courts. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 226 (S.C.)
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Ss.319 - Charge sheet filed - Ten out of six accused discharged - Charge framed against six accused - Magistrate can summon the discharged accused u/s 319 Cr.P.C. to face trial if fresh material against him comes on record during trial. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 081 (S.C.)
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Ss.340, 341(2) - Court took suo motu action u/s 340 Cr.P.C. - Order u/s 341 not appealable - Such an order is also not challengeable by way of revision. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 029 (S.C.)
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Ss.360, 361 - In a case where Court could have dealt with an accused u/s 360 of the Code, and yet does not want to grant the benefit of the said provision then it shall record in its judgment specific reasons for not having done so - Mandatory duty cast on Magistrate not performed - While upholding conviction matter remitted to trial Court for limited purpose for deciding whether the benefit u/s 360 Cr.P.C. can be extended to the appellants. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 026 (S.C.)
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Ss.374, 386 - Appeal against conviction - Concurrent findings of Courts below on pure questions of fact - Supreme Court ordinarily not to interfere unless there are exceptional circumstances - Question of reappreciation of evidence by third Court does not arise unless found to be totally perverse. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 129 (S.C.)
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.378 - Appeal against acquittal - High Court dismissed appeal by holding that it was a possible view - No discussion as to why it is so - Impugned order set aside. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 090 (S.C.)
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.378 - Appeal against acquittal - High Court simply referred to the conclusions of the trial Court to come to a conclusion that the same cannot be termed to be unreasonable or perverse - Impugned order set aside. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 090 (S.C.)
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.378 - Appeal against acquittal - There is no embargo on the Appellate Court reviewing the evidence upon which an order of acquittal is based - Appellate Court to interfere only when there are substantial reasons for doing so - If the impugned judgment is clearly unreasonable and irrelevant and convincing materials have been unjustifiably eliminated in the process, it is a substantial reason for interference. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 137 (S.C.)
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.389, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Ss.304-B, 498-A, Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, S.4 - Conviction u/ss 498-A, 304-B IPC and S.4 Dowry Prohibition Act - Appeal against - Bail during pendency of appeal - Accused in jail since October, 2003 - No possibility of appeal being heard on merits in near future - Bail granted. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 362 (Allahabad)
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.389 - Suspension of sentence during pendency of appeal - Decision likely to take time - Part of sentence already undergone - Remainder of sentence suspended till decision of appeal. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 075 (Rajasthan)
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.397(3), 482 - Power of High Court to entertain petition u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is not subject to prohibition u/s 397(3) Cr.P.C. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 210 (S.C.)
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Ss.437, 439 - Interim bail pending hearing of a regular bail application - Can be granted except in the following circumstances - (i) In a case of grave offence like murder, dacoity, robbery, rape etc. ; (ii) The case involves an offence under the U.P.Gangsters Act and in similar statutory provisions; (iii) The accused is likely to abscond and evade the processes of law; (iv) The accused is given to violent behaviour and is likely to commit further offences unless his movements are brought under restraint; (v) The accused is a habitual offender and unless kept in custody he is likely to commit similar offences again; (vi) The offence is in the nature of a scam, or there is an apprehension that there may be interference with the investigation or for any other reason the Magistrate/Competent Court feels that it is not a fit case for releasing the appellant on interim bail pending the hearing of the regular bail; (vii) An order of interim bail can also not be passed by a Magistrate who is not empowered to grant regular bail in offences punishable with death or imprisonment for life or under the other circumstances enumerated in section 437 Cr.P.C.; (viii) If the Public Prosecutor/investigating officer can satisfy the Magistrate/Court concerned that there is a bona fide need for custodial interrogation of the accused regarding various facets of motive, preparation, commission and aftermath of the crime and the connection of other persons, if any, in the crime, or for obtaining information leading to discovery of material facts, it may constitute a valid ground for not granting interim bail, and the Court in such circumstances may pass orders for custodial interrogation, or any other appropriate order. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 273 (Allahabad) (DB)
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.438 - Anticipatory bail - Cancellation - Granted by Sessions Court - Cancelled by High Court - Nothing on record that there was interference or attempt to interfere with the due course of administration of justice by the accused - No evidence that accused in any manner abused concession granted to him - No supervening circumstances surfaced nor shown justifying cancellation of anticipatory bail - Impugned order set aside. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 297 (S.C.)
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.438 - Anticipatory bail - Number of complaints against petitioner for indulging in demand and receiving a sum of Rs.200/- per consumer while providing electricity connection - Plea that it is not duly of petitioner to provide electric connection may be a good defence and ground for seeking concession of regular bail but not a ground for granting pre-arrest bail - Anticipatory bail refused. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 086 (P&H)
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.439, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Ss.406, 420 - Bail - Offence u/ss.406, 420 IPC - Accused an illiterate person and could only put signatures - Taking advantage of that, an agreement to sale of land prepared at the instance of the complainant - Accused not possessing any plot - Signatures were put only for the purpose of obtaining loan through the complainant - If agreement to sale had been executed then at least some documents pertaining to land should have been taken by the complainant whereas there exists no such document - Bail granted. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 152 (Rajasthan)
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.439, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Ss.498-A, 304-B, Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, Ss.3, 4 - Bail - Offence u/ss 498-A, 304-B IPC and Ss.3,4 Dowry Prohibition Act - Allegation of cruelty and demand of dowry - Three persons named in FIR - Unnatural death within a period of seven years of marriage - Post mortem report that deceased was murdered - Long incarceration is not a ground for bail - Bail refused. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 360 (Allahabad)
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.439 - Bail - Factors to be considered : 1. The nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence; 2. Reasonable apprehension of tampering of the witness or apprehension of threat to the complainant; 3. Prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 216 (S.C.)
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.439 - Bail - While granting bail Court should be satisfied whether there is a prima facie case - However, exhaustive exploration of the merits of the case is not necessary - Reasons for prima facie concluding need not to be indicated in the order. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 216 (S.C.)
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.482, 2(h) - Investigation - High Court can give direction for prompt investigation - However, High Court cannot direct the investigating agency to submit a report that is in accord with its views as that would amount to unwarranted interference with the investigation of the case by inhibiting the exercise of statutory power by the investigating agency. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 329 (S.C.)
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.482, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Ss.406, 324, 147, 504 and 506 - Police case - Complaint case by the other party - Happening of incident admitted - Prosecution launched by either cannot be said to be mala fide or vexatious - Both sides having their own version of the incident - Which version is correct can be seen and judged only when parties lead evidence - Prosecution launched by either side cannot be quashed nor the prosecution can be nipped into bud - A legitimately launched prosecution cannot be thwarted specially when disputed questions of facts exists to be adjudicated. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 311 (Allahabad)
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.482 - Charge framed u/s 302 IPC on considering statement of witnesses of PWs 1, 2 & 3 on which trial Court has summoned the applicant in exercise of power u/s 319 Cr.P.C. - Said witnesses made specific allegations of committing the murder against the applicants - No illegality in framing charge - Application dismissed. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 343 (Allahabad)
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.482 - Issuing directions in a casual and mechanical manner without hearing the appellants - Held, impugned order is a nullity and liable to be set aside only on that score. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 329 (S.C.)
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.482 - Observations - No uncalled for observations are to be made while disposing of matters and that too without hearing the persons likely to be affected. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 329 (S.C.)
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.482 - On a plaint reading of FIR it cannot be said that prima facie no cognizable offence is disclosed or that there are any legal fetters on the conduct of the investigation - Final relief of quashing of FIR cannot be granted. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 273 (Allahabad) (DB)
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.482 - Quashing of FIR and charge sheet - Power u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is exercised to prevent abuse of the process of law and court - Such power can be exercised only when complaint or charge sheet does not disclose any offence or when said complaint is found to be frivolous, vexatious or oppressive. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 158 (S.C.)
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.482 - Scope - High Court can exercise power u/s 482 of the Code either suo motu or on an application (i) to secure the ends of justice; (ii) the High Court may make such orders as may be necessary to give effect to any order under the Code; (iii) to prevent abuse of the process of any Court. There is no other ground on which the High Court may exercise its inherent power. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 329 (S.C.)
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.482 - Two cases - Both cases cross version of each other - Each party having his respective version regarding the incident - Both the sides must be afforded an opportunity to substantiate their version - Both the trials directed to be tried by the same Court one after another and the judgment be pronounced on the respective merits of each case on the same day. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 308 (Allahabad)
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.482 - When complaint does not disclose any criminal offence, the proceeding is liable to be quashed. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 153 (S.C.)
Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946
Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946, Ss.4 & 6, Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.154 - FIR - Bank Officers committing offence of misappropriation and corruption - Departmental authorities not lodging complaint - CBI registering a case on receipt of information and investigating - No illegality - Criminal law can be set in motion by anybody. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 226 (S.C.)
Evidence Act, 1872
Evidence Act, 1872, S.32 - Dying declaration - Can form the sole basis for conviction. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 062 (S.C.)
Evidence Act, 1872, S.32 - Dying declaration - Certificate of doctor - There is no requirement of law that dying declaration must necessarily contain a certificate by the doctor that the patient was in a fit state of mind especially when dying declaration was recorded by a Magistrate. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 001 (S.C.)
Evidence Act, 1872, S.32 - Dying declaration - Recorded by doctor - In his deposition doctor categorically sated that the deceased while making the dying declaration was conscious and in a fit mental condition to make such a statement - Held, dying declaration can be relied upon as the same was truthfully recorded and said statement gave a vivid account of the manner in which the incident had taken place. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 001 (S.C.)
Evidence Act, 1872, S.32 - Dying declaration - Signatures or thumb impression of deceased not taken - If a dying declaration is true and voluntary the same cannot be rejected merely on the ground that person who recorded the dying declaration did not or could not take the signature of the deceased on the dying declaration. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 001 (S.C.)
Indian Penal Code, 1860
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Ss.24, 25, 206, 421, 424, 207, 208, 210, 243, 246 to 253, 261, 264 to 266, 415 to 420, 422, 423, 463 to 471, 474, 477 & 496 - Fraudulently - A person is said to do a thing fraudulently if he does that thing with intent to defraud but not otherwise - Term "fraudulently" is mostly used with the term "dishonestly" which means "Whoever does anything with the intention of causing wrongful gain to one person or wrongful loss to another person is said to do that thing "dishonestly" - To defraud or do something fraudulently is not by itself made an offence under IPC but various acts when done fraudulently (or fraudulently and dishonestly) are made offences which include : (i) Fraudulent removal or concealment of property (sec.206, 421, 424); (ii) Fraudulent claim to property to prevent seizure (sec.207); (iii) Fraudulent suffering or obtaining a decree (sec.208 and 210); (iv) Fraudulent possession/delivery of counterfeit coin (sec.239, 240, 242 and 243); (v) Fraudulent alteration/diminishing weight of coin (sec. 246 to 253); (vi) Fraudulent acts relating to stamps (sec.261-261); (vii) Fraudulent use of false instruments/weight/measure (sec.264 to 266); (viii) Cheating (sec.415 to 420); (ix) Fraudulent prevention of debt being available to creditors (sec.422); (x) Fraudulent execution of deed of transfer containing false statement of consideration (sec.423); (xi) Forgery making or executing a false document (sec.463 to 471 and 474); (xii) Fraudulent cancellation/destruction of valuable security etc.(sec.477); (xiii) Fraudulently going through marriage ceremony (sec.496). 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 008 (S.C.) 3g 3
Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.34 - Common intention - If common intention is proved but no overt act is attributed to the individual accused, S.34 will be attracted as essentially it involves vicarious liability - But if participation of the accused in the crime is proved and common intention is absent, S.34 cannot be invoked. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 150 (S.C.)
Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.34 - Common intention - The liability of one person for an offence committed by another in the course of criminal act perpetrated by several persons arises u/s 34 IPC if such criminal act is done in furtherance of a common intention of the persons who join in committing the crime - S.34 IPC is applicable even if no injury is caused by the particular accused himself - For applying S.34 it is not necessary to show some overt act on the part of the accused. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 023 (S.C.)
Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.43 - Illegal - It consists of three ingredients : (1) everything which is an offence; (2) everything which is prohibited by law; and (3) everything which furnishes ground for civil action. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 226 (S.C.)
Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.120-B, National Housing Bank Act, 1987, Ss.14 & 49 - Grant of loan violating statutory provisions of law - Accused had the knowledge of the said transaction - Held, accused rightly convicted for commission of the offence of criminal conspiracy. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 226 (S.C.)
Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.120-B - Conspiracy - Hatched in secrecy - Can be established on the basis of legitimate inferences to be drawn from the facts on record. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 167 (Bombay)
Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.120-B - Criminal conspiracy - Ingredients of the offence are : (i) an agreement between two or more persons; (ii) the agreement must relate to doing or causing to be done either (a) an illegal act; (b) an act which is not illegal in itself but is done by illegal means - Criminal conspiracy is hatched in secrecy and it is difficult to obtain direct evidence to establish the same - Manner and circumstances in which offence is committed and the level of involvement of the accused persons therein are relevant factors - It is necessary to prove that the propounders had expressly agreed to or caused to be done the illegal act but it may also be proved otherwise by adduction of circumstantial evidence and/or by necessary implication - Agreement is essential and mere knowledge, or even discussion, of the plan is not, per se enough - Conduct of parties is also relevant. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 226 (S.C.)
Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.182 - Complaint made to SSP for registration of a criminal case - SSP marked complaint for inquiry - On inquiry case set up found to be false - Before inquiry no FIR was registered - Proceedings initiated u/s 182 IPC against complainant - SHO filed the kalendra - Kalendra quashed - Filing of kalendra under the signatures of SHO when complaint was made to SSP is not maintainable. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 292 (P&H)
Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.302 - Acquittal by High Court - Conclusions of High Court full of surmises and conjectures - No serious attempt made to analyse the evidence - FIR lodged promptly and accused specifically named therein - Medical evidence not at variance with ocular evidence - Hypothetical reason given by High Court regarding holding the deceased by accused not sufficient to discard credible eye witness account - Eye witness account if found credible, medical opinion pointing to alternative possibilities cannot be accepted as conclusive - Conviction order by trial Court restored. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 140 (S.C.)
Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.302 - Acquittal by trial Court - High Court convicted appellant only - Contradiction in testimony of informant who did not choose to give statement immediately when IO reached the scene - Damaged car not seized - Blood stains found in car not scrapped and sent for Chemical Examination - Blood stained earth and sample taken from new scene of offence - Ex.P94 not showing to contain blood - No reason given for not taking complaint from PW1 before taking the deceased to hospital - PW1 identified A1, A2 and A4 while PW2 identified only A4 - Conviction not sustainable - Appellant acquitted. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 078 (S.C.)
Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.302 - Extra judicial confession at 8 a.m. whereas FIR lodged at 11.30 a.m. - Delay in lodging FIR not explained - Extra judicial confession made before PW1 who did not report to police about it when police was in the house of accused at 8 a.m. - Testimony of PW1 at variance with testimony of PW14 - Absence of explanation as to why blood stained sickle in house of accused not noticed by police - Order of acquittal upheld. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 224 (S.C.)
Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.302 - Testimony of sole eye witness convincing, reliable and trustworthy - Conviction can be based on the reliable and convincing evidence of the sole eye witness. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 146 (S.C.)
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Ss.302, 34, Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Ss.154, 157 - Not a rule of universal application that when there is delay in lodging FIR and/or delay in despatching the report of Elaka Magistrate and/or medical evidence at some variance with the ocular evidence, prosecution has to fail - In the instant case the combined effect of the above facts leave no manner of doubt that prosecution has failed to establish the accusations - Order of acquittal upheld. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 044 (S.C.)
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Ss.302, 149 - Offence u/s 302 read with S.149 IPC against 15 persons - Public Prosecutor during course of trial conceded that no offence is made out against accused Nos.2 to 15 - Despite this Court convicted accused No.12 - Reasons given by High Court and conclusions drawn by it convicting the appellants found not defensible - Accused appellants acquitted of the charges. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 178 (S.C.)
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Ss.302, 149, 148, 147 - Acquittal by High Court - Non mention in FIR that PW1 and PW4 witnessed the occurrence - Medical evidence not supporting the ocular version - Several unexplained circumstances making prosecuting case doubtful - Order of acquittal upheld. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 170 (S.C.)
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Ss.302, 309 - Conviction u/s 302 & 309 IPC - FSL report that Aluminum phosphide found in viscera - No evidence that sulphoss tables were in possession of accused and that it is accused who mixed the same in flour while cooking - Investigation not fair - Parcha bayan of accused not amounting to confession since same not recorded by Magistrate - Accused brought to hospital in unconscious state - Parcha bayan shrouded in mystery - Guilt not proved beyond reasonable doubt - Accused acquitted. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 108 (Rajasthan) (DB)
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Ss.302, 498-A - Dowry demand - Ill treatment - Strangulation - Circumstantial evidence - Evidence of relatives established dowry demand - However, circumstances proved not sufficient to bring in offence u/s 302 IPC - Conviction u/s 302 IPC set aside - Conviction u/s 498-A IPC is proper. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 066 (S.C.)
Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.304 Part I - Disputes between appellant and his wife regarding his wayward habits - Appellant put her on fire resulting in 60% burns all over the body - Dying declaration recorded by Judicial Magistrate First Class - Dying declaration made on her own volition in presence of doctor and in fit state of mind - Deceased herself poured kerosene oil - Appellant lighted the match stick - High Court convicting u/s 304 Part I by taking lenient view - Conviction confirmed. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 062 (S.C.)
Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.304 Part I - Nature of offence - Prosecution version that there were altercations - High Court justified in altering conviction from S.302 to S.304-I IPC. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 023 (S.C.)
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Ss.304 Part I - Nature of offence - Sudden quarrel - Appellant got enraged and took out a hansiya from his house and attacked the complainant who received minor injuries - Single blow given to deceased by spear resulting in death - Incident took place without premeditation in a sudden fight - Accused did not take any undue advantage and did not act in a cruel or unusual manner - Case is covered by S.304 Part I IPC - Conviction altered from one u/s 302 IPC to S.304 Part I IPC. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 323 (Allahabad) (DB)
Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.304 Part II - Nature of offence - Accused and victim lived in the same house - On the night of occurrence deceased switched off the lights of the room - There were heated exchange of words between accused and deceased - Accused went inside the room and got a knife and stabbed the deceased resulting in his death - Occurrence took place at the spur of moment - Offence falls u/s 304 Part II IPC and not u/s 302 IPC. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 344 (S.C.)
Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.304 Part II - Nature of offence - High Court altered conviction from S.304 Part II IPC to S.302 IPC - Firing was done in spur of moment and there was a free fight - Impugned order set aside - Judgment of trial Court restored. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 204 (S.C.)
Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.304-B, Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, S.4 - Demand of money for construction of house - Cannot be termed as demand of dowry. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 049 (P&H)
Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.304-B, Evidence Act, 1872, S.113-B - Acquittal by trial Court - Conviction by High Court - High Court appreciating evidence afresh - High Court held, that case is completely covered u/s 113-B of Evidence Act as all the aspects such as the cruelty meted out to deceased, her unnatural death with the time span of seven years and constant demands of dowry were proved to the hilt - Deceased died in her own bed room in were hours and yet there was nothing, even suggestive, of any explanation - Order of conviction, upheld. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 039 (S.C.)
Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.304-B - Dowry death - Bride committing suicide within two years of marriage - Defence able to show that father of deceased, his sons and daughter were short tempered and that one of his sons committed suicide by throwing himself before running train - There was suicide tendency in the family - Accused acquitted. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 049 (P&H)
Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.304-B - Dowry death - Suicide by wife - Offence against husband, his father, mother and two brothers - There was no demand of dowry at the time of marriage or thereafter - It was the husband who lodged report with the police - Demand of money for construction of house - Father of deceased and his family members short tempered and one of his sons committed suicide by throwing himself before running train - Deceased wanted to live separately and wanted to open stitching school - No evidence that there was any cruelty or harassment for or in connection with the demand of dowry - Prosecution evidence falling short off establishing the nexus between the death of the woman and the alleged dowry related harassment - Accused acquitted. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 049 (P&H)
Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.326 - Expression "likely to cause death" - Expression is attributable to the instrument which is used as weapon of offence and not to the "grievous hurt". 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 180 (Kerala)
Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.326 - Grievous hurt - Conviction - Accused sentenced till rising of Court - Custodial sentence - Trial in the case commenced in the year 1993 - Considering long passage of time, it would be appropriate to restrict the period of sentence to the period already undergone. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 056 (S.C.)
Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.376 - Rape - Evidence of prosecutrix remained completely unchallenged - Sufficient to nail the accused. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 220 (S.C.)
Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.376 - Rape - High Court reduced sentence of seven years to imprisonment for period already undergone i.e. about six months - Sentence reduced merely on the ground that accused belonged to rural area - Not justified - Undue sympathy to accused in imposing inadequate sentence would do more harm to justice system and undermine the public confidence in the efficacy of legal system - Proportionality of sentence with the gravity of offence is an essential requirement - Impugned judgment of High Court set aside. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 058 (S.C.)
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Ss.376, 342 - Rape of minor girl - Statement of doctor that prosecutrix was not habitual of sexual intercourse and recent sexual intercourse within a week, cannot be ruled out - Rape established from statement of prosecutrix, medical report and statement of doctor - Occurrence reported to sister and mother immediately who corroborated same - No reason to disbelieve the minor girl - Nothing to suggest that prosecutrix was influenced by tutoring - Judgment of acquittal illegal and unjustified - Judgment of conviction by Sessions Judge restored. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 095 (S.C.)
Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.405 - Criminal breach of trust - Breach of trust simpliciter involves a civil wrong - However, a breach of trust with mens rea gives rise to a criminal prosecution as well - Element of 'dishonest intention' is therefore an essential element to constitute the offence of criminal breach of trust - The most essential ingredient of proof of criminal breach of trust is misappropriation with a dishonest intention - Breach of trust simpliciter is not an offence as is it not associated with intention which is dishonest. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 226 (S.C.)
Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.405 - Criminal breach of trust - Ingredients of the offence are : (1) Entrusting any person with property or with any dominion over property; (2) That person entrusted (a) dishonestly misappropriating or converting to his own use that property; or (b) dishonestly using or disposing of that property or willfully suffering any other person so to do in violation - (i) of any direction of law prescribing the mode in which such trust is to be discharged, or (ii) of any legal contract made touching the discharge of such trust. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 113 (S.C.)
Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.405 - Criminal breach of trust - Prosecution is not obliged to prove the precise mode of conversion, misappropriation or misapplication by the accused of the property entrusted to him or over which he has dominion - Entrustment of property and failure, in breach of an obligation, to account for the property entrusted, if proved, may in the light of other circumstances, justifiably lead to an inference of dishonest misappropriation or conversion - Conviction of a person for the offence of criminal breach of trust may not, in all cases, be founded merely on his failure to account for the property entrusted to him, or over which he has dominion, even when a duty to account is imposed upon him but where he is unable to account which is untrue, an inference of misappropriation with dishonest intent may readily be made. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 226 (S.C.)
Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.409 - Criminal breach of trust by public servant - Ingredients of the offence u/s 409 IPC are : (1) The accused must be a public servant; (2) He must have been entrusted, in such capacity with the property; (3) He must have committed breach of trust in respect of such property. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 226 (S.C.)
Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.409 - Offence u/s 409 IPC - Ingredients of the Offence u/s 409 IPC are : (i) The accused must be a public servant; (ii) He must have been entrusted, in such capacity, with property; (iii) He must have committed breach of trust in respect of such property. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 113 (S.C.)
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Ss.409, 406 - Criminal breach of trust by public servant - It is provision of S.409 which applies. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 226 (S.C.)
Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.415 - Abuse of prevalent banking practice by itself not sufficient to attract ingredients of cheating. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 113 (S.C.)
Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.415 - Cheating - Essential ingredients are : (i) deception of a person either by making a false or misleading representation or by dishonest concealment or by any other act or omission; (ii) fraudulent or dishonest inducement of that person to either deliver any property or to consent to the retention thereof by any person or to intentionally induce that person so deceived to do or omit to do anything which he would not do or omit if he were not so deceived; and (iii) such act or omission causing or is likely to cause damage or harm to that person in body, mind, reputation or property - To constitute an offence u/s420, there should not only be cheating, but as a consequence of such cheating, the accused should have dishonestly induced the person deceived (i) to deliver any property to any person, or (ii) to make, alter or destroy wholly or in part a valuable security (or anything signed or sealed and which is capable of being converted into a valuable security). 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 008 (S.C.)
Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.415 - Cheating - Ingredients of offence of cheating are : (i) deception of a person either by making a false or misleading representation or by other action or omission; (ii) fraudulently or dishonestly inducing any person to deliver any property; or (iii) to consent that any person shall retain any property and finally intentionally inducing that person to do or omit to do anything which he would not do or omit - Accused must have fraudulent or dishonest intention at the time of making promise or presentation - Even in a case when there is failure to keep promise, in absence of a culpable intention at the time of making initial promise being absent, no offence under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code can be said to have been made out. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 113 (S.C.)
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Ss.415, 420, 24, 25 - Fraudulently - By merely alleging or showing that a person acted fraudulently, it cannot be assumed that he committed an offence punishable under the Code or any other law, unless that fraudulent act is specified to be an offence under the Code or other law. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 008 (S.C.)
Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.417 - Promise of marriage - Promise of marriage in order to sexually exploit the prosecutrix may not amount to cheating if she succumbed to that promise. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 220 (S.C.)
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Ss.420, 24 - Dishonestly - Defined in S.24 of the Act means doing anything with intention of causing wrongful gain to one person or wrongful loss to another - Offence is complete when misappropriation of property is made dishonestly - Even a temporary misappropriation falls within the ambit of said offence. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 226 (S.C.)
Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.464 - Making a false document - A person is said to have made a 'false document', if (i) he made or executed a document claiming to be someone else or authorised by someone else; or (ii) he altered or tampered a document; or (iii) he obtained a document by practicing deception, or from a person not in control of his senses. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 008 (S.C.)
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Ss.464, 467 & 471 - Sale of property by a person who is not the owner thereof - Purchaser who is the person defrauded can complain that vendor committed the fraudulent act of cheating - A third party who is not the purchaser under the deed may not be able to make such complaint. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 008 (S.C.)
Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.498-A - Expln.(b) - Cruelty - In order to constitute cruelty under the provision of S.498-A Expln.(b) there has to be harassment of the woman with a view to coercing her or any person related to her to meet any unlawful demand for any property or valuable security or a case is to be made out to the effect that there is a failure by her or any person related to her to meet such demand. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 158 (S.C.)
Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.498-A - Cruelty - It is to be determined/inferred by considering the conduct of the man, weighing the gravity or seriousness of his acts and to find out as to whether it is likely to drive the woman to commit suicide etc. - It is to be established that the woman has been subjected to cruelty continuously/persistently or at least in close proximity of time of lodging the complaint - Petty quarrels cannot be termed as 'cruelty' to attract the provisions of S.498-A IPC - Causing mental torture to the extent that it becomes unbearable may be termed as cruelty. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 129 (S.C.)
Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.498-A - Cruelty - No evidence of cruelty on the part of accused with a view to drive the complainant to commit suicide - No evidence that there was a continuous physical or mental torture after the wife left the matrimonial home in the year 1993 - Accused contracted second marriage during subsistence of marriage and started living with another woman - Trial Court itself concluding that there was no evidence of cruelty on part of accused to drive complainant to commit suicide - Conviction u/s 498-A IPC set aside. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 129 (S.C.)
Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.498-A - Cruelty - There must be such a conduct on the part of the husband or relatives of the husband of woman which is of such a nature as to cause the woman to commit suicide or to cause grave injury or danger to life, limb or health whether mental or physical of the woman. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 158 (S.C.)
Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.498-A, Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.482 - No case u/s 498-A IPC made out either in the FIR or in the charge sheet - No conduct attributed to appellant which could amount to cruelty of such a nature as is likely to cause wife to commit suicide or to cause any injury to her life - Ingredients to constitute an offence u/s 498-A IPC not mentioned in FIR - FIR and charge sheet quashed. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 158 (S.C.)
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Ss.498-A, 306 - Abetment to commit suicide - Appellant, husband of deceased was demanding money from the deceased and prohibited deceased from spending money even from her salary and used to threaten her to divorce her - Deceased wrote a letter just before she committed suicide wherein she stated that appellant had harassed her so much that it would not be possible for her to live with him any more - Held, that it was a case of extreme mental cruelties and torture which compelled deceased to put an end to her life - Conviction calls for no interference. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 071 (S.C.)
Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000
Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000, S.12 - Juvenile - Bail - Can be refused if there appear reasonable grounds for believing that the release is likely to bring him into association with any known criminal or expose him to moral, physical or psychological danger or that his release would defeat the ends of justice - Order of refusal to grant bail not based on any such reason - Bail granted. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 057 (Rajasthan)
Medical negligence
Medical negligence - A professional may be held liable for negligence if he was not possessed of the requisite skill which he professed to have possessed or, he did not exercise, with reasonable competence in the given case the skill which he did possess - The standard to be applied for judging negligence is that of an ordinary person exercising skill in that profession - It is not necessary for every professional to possess the highest level of expertise in that branch which he practises. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 277 (S.C.)
Medical negligence - Burden is on the claimant to prove breach of duty, injury and causation - The injury must be sufficiently proximate to the medical practitioner's breach of duty - In the absence of evidence to the contrary adduced by the opposite party, an inference of causation may be drawn even though positive or scientific proof is lacking. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 277 (S.C.) 3 3
Medical negligence - Civil and criminal law - For civil law term negligence is used for the purpose of fastening the defendant with liability of the amount of damages - To fasten liability in criminal law, the degree of negligence has to be higher than that of negligence enough to fasten liability for damages in civil law. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 277 (S.C.)
Medical negligence - Transfusion of mismatched blood - Not an error of professional judgment - It is medical negligence - Order to pay compensation of rupees two lakhs, upheld. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 277 (S.C.)
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Ss.8, 18 & 50 - Leave to appeal - Refusal by High Court on ground that there was non compliance of mandatory requirement of S.50 of the Act - Search of bag, briefcase or container cannot be treated as search of body of human being - High Court did not consider true effect of S.50 - Appeal directed to be heard by High Court on merits. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 031 (S.C.)
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Ss.8, 21, Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.439 - Bail - Offence u/ss 8, 21 NDPS Act - Recovery of 300 gm. of smack - FSL report of 31.25% of heroin i.e. actual weight of heroin coming to 93.75 gm. which is below commercial quantity - No criminal history of accused - Accused in jail for more than one year - Bail granted. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 341 (Allahabad)
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, S.21(b) - Contraband - Criminal trial does not admit any gap or missing link in proper sealing of seized article and that there was no chance of tampering with the same at the time of its retention in police station and it is the same packet which was sent for chemical analysis. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 045 (Orissa)
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, S.21(b) - Contraband - No evidence that sample seal was made available either to the Court or the chemical examiner for comparison - Accused acquitted. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 045 (Orissa)
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, S.21(b) - Contraband - Official witnesses - Their evidence replete with contradictions and inconsistencies - Inconsistencies and contradictions render their veracity doubtful - Accused acquitted. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 045 (Orissa)
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Ss.22, 29, 42, 50, Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.100 - Contraband - Recovery of huge quantity - At time of search accused not apprised of his right of being searched before Gazetted officer or Magistrate - Information received by seizing officer not recorded before conducting raid - Even after raid was conducted it was not communicated to higher officers within period of 72 hours - Provision of S.100 Cr.P.C. also not complied with - Acquittal of accused, held, proper. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 033 (Delhi)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Bank - Means drawee Bank on which the cheque is drawn and not any other Bank. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 314 (Bombay)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Complaint can be filed by payee through his power of attorney holder. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 282 (S.C.)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Defence witnesses - Trial Court denying to summon defence witnesses - Order set aside - Trial Court directed to summon those witnesses who are named in the application. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 089 (Rajasthan)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Jurisdiction - Court within whose jurisdiction the cheque was merely presented for realisation has no territorial jurisdiction to try the offence. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 314 (Bombay)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Notice - Amount claimed in notice double the amount of cheque - However, in complaint cheque amount mentioned - Cheque amount shown in affidavit sworn by him as his evidence in examination-in-chief - Discrepancy of amount in notice does not disentitle the complainant to claim the amount of cheque. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 194 (Karnataka)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Notice - Receipt of notice and non payment of demanded amounts are ingredients which have precedence over the place wherefrom the notice of demand was issued. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 314 (Bombay)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Offence is complete after commission of several interconnected acts. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 314 (Bombay)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138, Bankers' Books Evidence Act, 1891, Ss.4, 2(3) - Dishonour of cheque - Memo of dishonour - Mode of proof and evidentiary value attached to certain document u/s 4 of Bankers Books Evidence Act is not available to a memo of dishonour. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 356 (Kerala)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138, Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.200 - Dishonour of cheque - Complaint - Recording statement of complainant - Not an empty formality - Recording statement cannot be done mechanically by simply filing details such as date of cheque, name of bank etc. in a format already kept ready - Order issuing process without recording proper statement liable to be set aside - Complaint remanded and relegated to stage of recording statement u/s 200 Cr.P.C. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 099 (Bombay)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138, Evidence Act, 1872, Ss.45, 73 - Dishonour of cheque - Cheque alleged to be forged and fabrication - Comparison of signatures by an expert - Opportunity granted to examine an expert at own cost. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 337 (S.C.)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, Ss.138, 139 - Dishonour of cheque - Presumption - Available when there is legally enforceable debt as on date of issuing of cheque - Accused not supposed to prove his defence beyond all reasonable doubt but is only to prove same as probable. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 194 (Karnataka)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, Ss.138, 141 - Dishonour of cheque - Company - Complaint against company and other Directors - Specific averment in complaint that accused persons were incharge of and in control of day to day affairs and management of accused company - Case made out u/s 141 of the Act - Order issuing process against company and other accused, held, proper. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 099 (Bombay)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, Ss.138, 141 - Dishonour of cheque - Company - Complaint filed by special power of attorney holder - Complaint is maintainable as company had authorised him to file complaint. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 319 (Allahabad)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, Ss.138, 141 - Dishonour of cheque - Complaint against Managing Director and other directors - Said accused shown to be responsible for conduct of business of the company at relevant time - Complaint against them is maintainable - However, absence of averment against other directors that they were incharge of and were responsible for conduct of business of the company - Compliant against other directors not maintainable. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 319 (Allahabad)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, Ss.138, 146 - Dishonour of cheque - Memo of dishonour - If a memo, bearing official mark denoting reason of dishonour is produced, Court is bound to presume that the cheque has been dishonoured for the reason stated in the memo. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 356 (Kerala)
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947, S.5(1)(d)(2), Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.161 - Illegal gratification - Patwari - Trap case - Recovery of marked currency notes of Rs.200/- - Plea that it was towards payment of land revenue - Held, mere receipt of amount by accused is not sufficient to fasten guilt in absence of any evidence of demand and acceptance of the amount as illegal gratification - Accused acquitted. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 171 (Rajasthan)
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947, S.5(1)(d)(2), Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.161 - Illegal gratification - Trap case - In a trap case demand of bribe is very material - Once the story of demand falls through, the authenticity of trap become highly doubtful because acceptance of bribe germinates through demand. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 171 (Rajasthan)
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, S.13(1) - Corruption case - Fact finding committee appointed - Report holding a person guilty of offence - Report cannot form basis of conviction. (S.C.) 226
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, S.13(1)(d) - In absence of any evidence of conspiracy or any wrongful gain, provision of Act are not attracted. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 113 (S.C.)
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, S.13(1)(d)(iii) - Public servant - Corruption - Grant of loan to a private person against statutory provisions of law - Private person utilized loan and returned back same with interest - Held, Bank officers are guilty of offence under Prevention of Corruption Act. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 226 (S.C.)
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, S.13(1)(d)(i) & (ii) - In order to make out an offence u/s 13(1)(d)(ii) prosecution must establish that the public servant has abused his position as a public servant whereas it is not necessary to make out offence u/s 13(1)(d)(i) of the Act - Material on record prima facie establishing that petitioner has committed an offence u/s 13(1)(d)(i) which is punishable u/s 13(2) of the Act. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 167 (Bombay)
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, S.19 - Corruption - Public servant - Sanction for prosecution - Officer of Reserve Bank of India sent on deputation to National Housing Bank wherein he was absorbed permanently - Sanction for prosecution granted by Chairman-cum-Managing Director of Housing Bank - Sanction is legal and valid - Regulations of Reserve Bank of India do not apply. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 226 (S.C.)
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, S.19 - Sanction for prosecution - Lack of application of mind - Sanction by Under Secretary for and on behalf of Governor - Clear distinction of cases to be made at threshold level by characterising them as cases where there is no sanction and cases where sanction not meeting requirement of law - It is a matter required to be examined during trial - When order is passed on behalf of Governor, genuineness cannot be doubted - Invalidity of sanction is to be examined during trial - Open to petition to raise it at appropriate stage - No need to hold up the proceedings. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 206 (Karnataka)
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, S.19(3) - Corruption case against Public Servant - Sanction for prosecution - Sanctioning Authority need not be examined as a witness by the prosecution. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 134 (S.C.)
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, S.19(3) - Corruption - Public servant - Sanction for prosecution - Granted by Authority not competent to grant - Accused convicted - Conviction cannot be set aside if there was no failure of justice on account of error in order of sanction. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 226 (S.C.)
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, S.19(3) - Public Servant - Corruption case - Sanction for prosecution - Conviction cannot be set aside on the ground of 'error, omission or irregularity' in passing the sanction order without recording a finding that a serious failure of justice has been caused to the accused. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 134 (S.C.)
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Ss.19, 12, 7 & 11 - Public servant - Sanction for prosecution - Prosecution for an offence punishable u/s 12 of the Act - S.19 of the Act specifically omits S.12 from its purview - Held, sanction for prosecution for an offence punishable u/s 12 of the Act is not required. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 365 (S.C.)
Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954
Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, Ss.7, 16, 13(2) - Ghee - Complaint filed after five years of receiving Public Analyst's report - Accused lost his valuable right of second analysis from Central Food Laboratory as available u/s 13(2) of the Act as it was not possible to get a correct report in relation to that sample because of lapse of time - Right of accused prejudiced - Proceedings quashed. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 076 (Rajasthan)
Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, Ss.7, 16 - Kulfi - Sample taken in a bottle after emptying milk which was taken as sample from others - Probably bottles contained little milk - Order of acquittal upheld. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 192 (Rajasthan)
Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, Ss.16 & 7, Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955, Rules 32(c)(i) & (ii), Standard Weighment and Measurements Package Commodities Rules, 1977, R.10 - Food article - Packed commodity - Name of State not mentioned - However, PIN Code given - Held, once the PIN Code is given the requirement of law stands satisfied - No offence made out - Accused acquitted. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 143 (P&H)
Protection of Women From Domestic Violence Act, 2005
Protection of Women From Domestic Violence Act, 2005, Ss.18 & 31 - Protection order or interim protection order - Magistrate can direct registration of case and investigation u/s 31 of the Act only for the breach of either a protection order or an interim protection order passed u/s 18 of the Act. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 218 (Kerala)
Protection of Women From Domestic Violence Act, 2005, Ss.18 & 31, Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987, S.21, - Lok Adalat - Unless an award passed by Lok Adalat is in terms of S.18 of Domestic Violence Act, it cannot be a protection order or an interim protection order - Breach thereof will not attract an offence u/s 31 of Protection of Women From Domestic Violence Act. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 218 (Kerala)
Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934
Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934, S.42 - Cash Reserve ratio - Provision is mandatory in nature - Maintaining cash reserve ratio is a statutory requirement - Consequences of non compliance are provided in S.42(3) and (3A). 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 226 (S.C.)
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, S.3(1)(xi) - Non mention of caste of accused in FIR - Not a ground to quash proceedings - Accused whether belongs to scheduled caste or schedule tribe can be gone into when the matter is being investigated. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 182 (S.C.)
Special Courts (Trial of Offences Relating to Transactions in Securities) Act, 1992
Special Courts (Trial of Offences Relating to Transactions in Securities) Act, 1992, Ss.2(c) and 7(2) - Call money transactions - Offence as to - Jurisdiction of Special Court to try the offence - Held, Special Court has jurisdiction even in case where transaction is somehow related to securities which extends also to the utilization of any amount relating to transactions in securities and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 226 (S.C.)
Altercations - High Court justified in altering conviction from S.302 to S.304-I IPC. 2009(4) Criminal Court Cases 023 (S.C.)