Advanced Search Results

Venu @ Venugopal and ors. Vs. State of Karnataka

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860 - Sections 390, 392 and 395

Reported in : AIR2008SC1199; 2008(1)ALD(Cri)652; 2008(56)BLJR1010; 2008CriLJ1634; JT2008(1)SC656; 2008(3)KarLJ1; 2008(2)SCALE129; (2008)3SCC94

Single Judge of the Karnataka High Court holding the appellants guilty of offence punishable under Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short the 'IPC') and sentencing each of 10 years imprisonment. 2. Prosecution version in a nutshell is … be noted that the Section 392 provides punishment for robbery. It is punishment for the offence defined in Section 390. Punishment is higher if it is committed on a highway and between sunset and sunrise. Section 390 which

Sheo Murar and ors. Vs. State

Court : Allahabad

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1898 - Sections 435; Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860 - Sections 390

Reported in : AIR1955All128; 1955CriLJ336

not apply to case decided by Panchayat Adalat. (ii) Difference between robbery and theft - Section 390 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 - theft becomes robbery - when force is used while committing theft. -

Sambar Malik and ors. Vs. Gopala Malik and ors.

Court : Orissa

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1973 - Sections 432; Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860 - Sections 120B, 390, 391, 395, 396, 397 and 399

Reported in : 1995CriLJ3064

learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magisrate, Jaipur (in short, the SDJM) taking cognizance of offence punishable Under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short, 'IPC') and directing issue of process to petitioners. According to them, ingredients necessary to constitute an … is an aggravated form of robbery which is committed by five or more persons. Robbery is defined in Section 390 and it provides that in all robberies there is either theft or extortion. Theft is robbery if it

Mariappan Vs. State of Tamil Nadu

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Criminal

her house over a land dispute by the appellant-accused, claiming the plea of insanity under Section 84 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short ‘the IPC’). Parvathi @ Kili (the deceased), her husband Parasivam Chettiar (PW-6) and their grand daughters … by the Additional District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court No. IV), Madurai at Periakulam in S.C. No. 390 of 2002. 2) Brief facts a) The case on hand relates to the death of a woman in

Mariyappan Vs. State of T.Nadu

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Criminal

her house over a land dispute by the appellant-accused, claiming the plea of insanity under Section 84 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short ‘the IPC’). Parvathi @ Kili (the deceased), her husband Parasivam Chettiar (PW-6) and their grand daughters

State of Maharashtra Vs. Vinayak Tukaram Utekar and Another

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860 - Sections 324, 360, 379, 390, 391, 394, 395 and 397

Reported in : 1997(2)MhLj527

43. Order accordingly. Criminal - acquittal - Sections 324, 360, 379, 390, 391, 394, 395 and 397 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 - appeal against acquittal for offence punishable under Section 397 - evidence on record to establish respondent had

Keshav Vs. State of Maharashtra

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860 - Sections 325; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1973 - Sections 307, 374, 377, 386, 389, 390, 391, 392, 401 and 482

Reported in : 1990(2)BomCR196; 1990CriLJ152

of fine. Both the revisions are disposed of accordingly.9. Order accordingly. Criminal - conviction - Section 325 of Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 307, 374, 377, 386, 389, 390, 391, 392, 401 and 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 -

Shiv Kumar Jatia Vs. State of Nct of Delhi

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Land Acquisition

offences under 2 Crl.A. @ SLP( Crl.)No.8008/18 etc. etc. Sections 336 and 338 read with Section 32 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short IPC) and Section 4 of the Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products (Prohibition of Trade and Commerce,

AmIn Khan Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Arms Act, 1959 - Sections 3 and 35; Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860 - Sections 396; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1973 - Sections 378, 378(3), 379, 390, 396, 411A, 417(2), 427 and 482

Reported in : 2009(57)BLJR1012; 2009CriLJ2266; 2009(3)SCALE391; (2009)3SCC776; 2009(2)LC1008(SC); [2009] 3 SCR 348

High Court, Jaipur Bench. Six persons faced trial for alleged commission of offences punishable under Section 396 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short the `IPC') and Sections 3 and 35 of the Arms Act, 1959 (in short the `Arms … leave and summoned the respondents through bailable warrants. On 14.8.2006 the State filed an application in terms of Section 390 read with Section 482 of Code for revoking the earlier order and to commit the accused persons to

Nazeema vs State of Kerala

Court : Kerala

also inflicted hurt on him.11. In order to have a better understanding of the case, the provisions of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 dealing with the offences referred to is appropriate to be extracted hereunder. Section 328 IPC reads :“328. Causing … prosecution needs to prove that the accused hascommitted hurt on the victim. Similarly for an offence -:13:- under Section 390 liable to be punished under Section 394 IPC to be attracted, the prosecution needs to prove that the