Inidan Penal Code Ipc Sections 215 - Judgment Search Results

Sri. H B Chandramohan vs State of Karnataka

Court: Karnataka

a few words. Prosecution of the appellant under Section 120-B read with Sections 420 and 471 of the Penal Code, 1860 (in brief ‘IPC’) was assailed for absence of sanction under Section 188 of the Criminal Procedure Code … and it’s corresponding provision, Section 208 of the BNSS, contemplate that an offence committed outside India by an Inidan citizen, or by any person on a ship or aircraft registered in India, may be dealt with in

Shashank C vs State of Karnataka

Court: Karnataka

a few words. Prosecution of the appellant under Section 120-B read with Sections 420 and 471 of the Penal Code, 1860 (in brief ‘IPC’) was assailed for absence of sanction under Section 188 of the Criminal Procedure Code … and it’s corresponding provision, Section 208 of the BNSS, contemplate that an offence committed outside India by an Inidan citizen, or by any person on a ship or aircraft registered in India, may be dealt with in

HussaIn Ali Vs. the State of Hyderabad

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1952CriLJ1005

obtained for the prosecution of offences under Section 161 and Section 120B, read with Section 420 of the Inidan Penal Code. They were acquitted by the trial Court; but on an appeal the acquittal was set aside and the … driver employed by the Government, and is being prosecuted for offences under Sections 220 and 245 of the Hyderabad Penal Code, which correspond to Sections … the previous sanction of the Government. This Hyderabad section was similar to the old Section 197 of the Indian Criminal Procedure Code, for there was nothing in it corresponding to the words 'while acting or purporting to

Smt. Madhuri Mukund Chitnis Vs. Mukund Martand Chitnis and Another

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 1991(1)BomCR683; (1991)93BOMLR157; 1992CriLJ111

cases is wholly unjustified and impermissible. Overzealous judicial dispensation can invite ridicule.;Section 498-A was grafted on to the Inidan Penal Code specifically to deal firmly and effectively with all cases of cruelty and harassment to women. If the law … a new dimension to the interpretation of the concept of cruelty as embodied in Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code. It concerns an area of immense importance because the point at issue is the question as … dimension to the interpretation of the concept of cruelty as embodied in Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code. It concerns an area of immense

Vijay Kumar Arora Vs. State

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 150(2008)DLT638; II(2008)DMC58; 2008(103)DRJ661

and in default of its payment further rigorous imprisonment of one year under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC for short). On 11.1.1985 the Appellant/Convict as well as his mother, Smt. Beena Arora, wife of Shri S.P. … 2,000/- (Rupees Two Thousand Only) and in default of its payment further rigorous imprisonment of one year under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC for short). On 11.1.1985 the Appellant/Convict as well as his mother,

NizamuddIn and ors. Vs. State of Delhi

Court: Delhi

(Nizamuddin, Sirajuddin and Riazuddin) were convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 Indian Penal Code (IPC) and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of ` 1,000/ each. In default … Judge (Trial Court) whereby the three Appellants (Nizamuddin, Sirajuddin and Riazuddin) were convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 Indian Penal Code (IPC) and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to

State Vs. Kiran Chand

Court: Delhi

Sessions Judge dated 12.8.2010 acquitting the accused-Respondent of the charge of having committed offence under Section 498/304B/34 Indian Penal Code (IPC). 2. The brief facts alleged by the prosecution were that the deceased-Munni married Chandra Kant on 22.11.2002. She … the learned Additional Sessions Judge dated 12.8.2010 acquitting the accused-Respondent of the charge of having committed offence under Section 498/304B/34 Indian Penal Code (IPC). 2. The brief facts alleged by the prosecution were that the deceased-Munni married

Pradeep @ Sanjay and anr. Vs. State (Nct of Delhi)

Court: Delhi

their sentence. The Registry shall transmit the Trial Court records and this judgment, forthwith, to ensure compliance.  Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 302 - Punishment for murder -- The disclosure statements of both the accused persons were recorded. 4. PW-1

Maya Chanchal and ors. Vs. State

Court: Delhi

dated 23.09.1997 whereby the Appellants were convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 452/307/392 /397/302/34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and were sentenced to undergo RI for three years and to pay a fine of ` 500/- and

Nandavarapu Ramesh Babu Vs. State Rep.by Its Public Prosecutor, High

Court: Andhra Pradesh

of 1995 of Neelakanthapuram Police Station, Vizianagaram District. It was a case under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC, for short) as well as under Sections 148 and 149 IPC. The charge sheet was also laid for