Criminal Law Amendment Act 1961 Section 5 - Judgment Search Results

State Vs. Shankar Bhaurao Khirode

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: AIR1959Bom437; (1959)61BOMLR591; 1959CriLJ1153; ILR1959Bom1088

offence is a cognizable offence for the purpose of the criminal procedure code subject to the condition that the police officers cases of offences falling under section 6 of the criminal law amendment act the stage of trial alone must be conducted perfectly consistent with section 8 1 of the criminal law amendment act which as already stated enables the court of a under section 7 which immediately before the commencement of the act were pending before any magistrate shall on such commencement be in character to the order which he could make under section 203 criminal procedure code where he acts on a report sections 161 165 and 165a i p c by section 5 of the criminal law amendment act 1952 in the first

iqbal Singh Vs. State, Etc.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 1977CriLJ501; ILR1977Delhi100

persons shall follow the procedure prescribed by the code of criminal procedure 1898 act v of 1898 for the trial of being committed to him turn trial 8 the requirement of law having been clearly set out in subsection 2 the question and not before the special judge section 8 of the amendment act being a specific provision entitling a special judge to a permanent measure by the code of criminal procedure amendment act 1955 10 the importance that parliament attached to sub section 2 b empowers a magistrate notwithstanding anything contained in sub section 2 a to send the case for trial to the section 337 of the code by the parliament by section 5 of the amendment act while the provision pertaining to the

Major E.G. Barsay and ors. Vs. the State

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 1958CriLJ1144

judge or an assistant sessions judge under the code of criminal procedure 1898 under section 8 1 a special judge may of criminal procedure under section 6 2 of the criminal law amendment act a person shall not be qualified for appointment within the ambit of the provisions of the criminal law amendment act 1952 in the above case it appears that there any manner incompetent and against the provisions of the army act or the rules framed thereunder as also the rules framed and d of the prevention of corruption act read with section 109 of the indian penal code and though the charge 5 l c and section 5 1 d punishable under 5 2 of the prevention of corruption act read with section

Raju @ Rajan Vs. State of Tamil Nadu represented by the Inspector of P ...

Court: Chennai

under section 374 r w 382 of the code of criminal procedure against the judgment of learned iii additional district and euro ldquo code of criminal procedure 1973 euro ldquo criminal law amendment act 2013 euro ldquo rape euro ldquo conviction euro at the time of occurrence euro ldquo thus the pre amendment provision applies euro ldquo offence under section 376 of ipc between victim and appellant no 1 could also be an act of volition euro ldquo so considered appellant safely cannot be thus the pre amendment provision applies euro ldquo offence under section 376 of ipc would not stand attracted euro ldquo conviction appellant a1 and pw 2 at the house of pw 5 at kadambur accused 2 to 7 departed appellant a1 confined

Matsheng Jacob Chake Vs. the State

Court: South Africa Supreme Court of Appeal

of the provisions of chapters 30 and 31 of the criminal procedure act provided that if that child was at the under the provisions of s 51 1 of the criminal law amendment act 105 of 1997 the cla unless there were the provisions of s 51 1 of the criminal law amendment act 105 of 1997 the cla unless there were substantial lower court and in terms of section 316 of that act in the case of an appeal from a high court 75 of 2008 came into operation on 1 april 2010 section 84 o33f that act provides 1 an appeal by a to the decision in s v alam 2011 2 sacr 553 wcc in which it had been held that since 1

K.M. Sundaram, Executive Committee Member, Communist Party of India, T ...

Court: Chennai

Reported in: (1971)1MLJ196

506 indian penal code and section 7 1 of the criminal law amendment act and was remanded by s d m dated 3rd august 1970 under section 10 of the criminal law amendment act 1932 declaring the offences under sections 188 and 447 426 506 and section 7 of the criminal law amendment act 1932 and was remanded by the district magistrate tiruchirapalli code and section 7 1 of the criminal law amendment act and was remanded by s d m gudalur respondent no their detention is by the magistrates exercising their powers under section 167 criminal procedure code 12 under article 22 1 of amendment act 1932 declaring the offences under sections 188 and 506 indian penal code as cognizable and non bailable is unconstitutional

In Re: Bisabathuni Ramalingayya

Court: Chennai

Reported in: AIR1950Mad391

said shall not be covered by sections 497 and 498 criminal p c and no court shall grant bail for such is afraid that the language used in section17 3 criminal law amendment act of 1908 will make it impossible for this by analogy the offence under section 17 1 criminal law amendment act similar to those offences can be argued to be that the language used in section17 3 criminal law amendment act of 1908 will make it impossible for this court to to persons like the petitioner accused of an offence under section 17 1 his fears are groundless

V.G. Row Vs. the State of Madras

Court: Chennai

Reported in: AIR1951Mad147; (1951)IMLJ628

public general dated 10 3 1950 declaring under section 16 criminal law amendment act 1908 the people s education society as notwithstanding the provisions in clause 3 of section 17 criminal law amendment act the ct has power to grant bail in the amendment broad comprehensive as it is nor any other amendment was designed to interfere with the power of the state only as the result of a conviction under the impungned act not directly under it reference was made to a k an implied power for the justices to summarily convict under section 57 contagious diseases animals act 1870 was recognised in cullen chief justice observed at p 441 in my opinion clause 5 must be given its full meaning the question which the

Zahoor Ahmad Vs. State of Rajasthan

Court: Rajasthan

Reported in: 1975CriLJ978; 1974(7)WLN298

..... necessary to try the offences mentioned in sub section 1 a of section 6 which includes offences under section 5 of the p c act section 7 of criminal law amendment act lays down that the offences specified in sub ..... of the offence under section 409 indian penal code he placed reliance on ramautar mahton v the state air 1961 pat 20 1961 1 cri lj 694 and sahebkhare umerkhan v the state 1963 2 .....

Khazansingh and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan

Court: Rajasthan

Reported in: AIR1967Raj221

..... erroneous because he failed to give effect to section 5 1 a of the criminal law amendment amending act 1966 mr the language of section 5 1 of the criminal law amending act 1966 clearly makes a distinction between the two ..... appointed under the criminal law amendment act because they were not magistrates the matter went up to the supreme court and in e g barsay v state of bombay air 1961 sc 1762 their .....