Showing : 3991-4000 of 7860 Results

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Year of decision: 2011
Details
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 304-- Nature of offence - Appellant sat on the chest of deceased and held his head and repeatedly hit it against the ground and also hit his head with stone - No external injury - Injuries were caused not with a stone but it was the concussion and the rough handling by the appellant that led to the..........
RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2011
Details
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Section 438, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 498A, 406-- Anticipatory bail - Offence u/ss 498-A, 406 IPC - Accused never made a demand of dowry nor subjected complainant to cruelty - Bills attached in the investigation file do not reveal as to by whom and when the ornaments were purchased and who sold them - Bills do not seem to be genuine -..........
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2011
Details
Haryana Urban (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1973, Section 22(2), 13(2)(i) 3rd-- - Landlord claimed and received rent for 50 months instead of 38 months contrary to S.13(2)(i) 3rd Proviso - Held, violations of S.13(2)(i) 3rd Proviso is no offence in terms of S.22 of the Act - Hence not punishable...........
DELHI HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2011
Details
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, Section 138,142-- Dishonour of cheque - Territorial jurisdiction - Held, in criminal jurisprudence place of residence or business of complainant or for that matter of accused would not attract jurisdiction of that court - It is the place where offence or part offence had been committed which would vest..........
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2011
Details
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, Section 138, 139-- Dishonour of cheque - Legally enforceable debt - Determination - Accused had purchased goodwill of complainant in partnership and it was agreed that accused should refund advance amount paid to landlord - Held, it becomes liability on part of accused due to complainant - It cannot be said that..........
MADRAS HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2011
Details
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, Section 138, 141-- Dishonour of cheque - Territorial jurisdiction - Statutory notice was given by complainant's counsel from his office at "T" - Held, issuance of notice alone will not give rise to a cause of action to maintain complaint before Judicial Magistrate "T" - Judicial Magistrate "T" does not have..........
MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2011
Details
M.P.Vinirdishta Bhrashta Acharan Nivaran Adhiniyam, 1982, Section 39, Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Section 197,156, Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Section 19-- Cognizance of offence - Offence under Adhiniyam Committed while committing main offence of forgery - No cognizance to be taken unless sanction to direct investigation is obtained in view of S.39 of Adhiniyam - Held, S.39 not applicable because offence under Adhiniyam not main offence, it was..........
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2011
Details
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Section 439, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 498A, 304B, Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, Section 3, 4-- Bail - Offence u/ss 498-A, 304-B IPC and Ss.3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act - Bail application by mother-in-law - Mother-in-law neither named in the FIR nor any overt act attributed to her - Allegations against her general in nature - Held, in this factual situation, mother-in-law entitled to be..........
MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2011
Details
M.P.Vinirdishta Bhrashta Acharan Nivaran Adhiniyam, 1982, Section 39,6,43, Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Section 193-- Cognizance of offence under Section 6 - Appellants convicted for minor offence - Cognizance of offence cannot be taken under Section 6 of Adhiniyam unless case is committed by Magistrate - Held, conviction improper as Special Judge took cognizance without committal proceedings being complied with...........
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Year of decision: 2011
Details
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 376(2)(g), 342-- Rape - Conviction - Accused sentenced to 10 years RI and fined Rs.1000/- each - Sentence upheld by High Court - Appellants had already undergone about three years of imprisonment - Incident 14 years old - Appellants and prosecutrix are married (not to each other) - Prosecutrix had also two..........

Showing : 3991-4000 of 7860 Results