Section 420 Of The Indian Penal Code 1860 And - Judgment Search Results
Home > Cases Phrase: section 420 of the indian penal code 1860 and Year: 1939 Page 1 of about 300 results (0.587 seconds)Emperor Vs. R.K. Naik
Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Aug-04-1939
Reported in : (1939)41BOMLR1227
..... bill cheating indian penal code act xlv of 1860 section 420 notice to prosecute absence of notice a prosecution against an administrative officer of a local board for an offence punishable under section 420 of the indian penal code 1860 for submitting .....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTShankarlal Jadhavji Joshi Vs. the Municipal Commissioner of Bombay
Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Feb-23-1939
Reported in : AIR1939Bom431; (1939)41BOMLR911
roll as contemplated by the letter of the provisions of section 19 3 and 4 that a properly prepared roll being
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTJhina Soma Vs. Emperor
Court : Mumbai
Decided on : May-09-1939
Reported in : AIR1939Bom457; (1939)41BOMLR965
and should avoid criminal procedure code act v of 1898 sections 297 and 537 charge to jury omission to explain law was concerned and under sections 302 and 114 of the indian penal code so far as the second and third accused thereby committed an offence under section 302 of the indian penal code so far as the first accused was concerned and j 8 i agree section 297 of the criminal procedure code in very dear terms enjoins the sessions judge to charge
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTIn Re: Veerappa Moopan
Court : Chennai
Decided on : Jan-19-1939
Reported in : AIR1939Mad496; (1939)1MLJ573
before supreme court held concurrent finding cannot be interfered with section 20 tarun chatterjee aftab alam jj whether time is the a certain person for offences under sections 447 and 188 indian penal code in respect of a certain act which was certain person for offences under sections 447 and 188 indian penal code in respect of a certain act which was said sub magistrate issued under section 144 of the criminal procedure code in other words the very sub magistrate whose orders are
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTK. Sundaresa Aiyar Vs. the Sarvajana Sowkiabivirdhi Nidhi Limited, by ...
Court : Chennai
Decided on : Mar-15-1939
Reported in : (1939)2MLJ624
jewels in good faith and that it was protected by sections 178 and 178 a of the contract act but dismissed with criminal breach of trust under section 409 of the indian penal code on the 26th of october 1932 subba rao criminal breach of trust under section 409 of the indian penal code 2 in the written statement the respondent company pleaded proceedings were taken under sections 145 and 146 of the code of criminal procedure and a receiver was appointed to hold
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTP. Gopalachari Vs. the Corporation of Madras
Court : Chennai
Decided on : Jul-20-1939
Reported in : (1940)2MLJ88
on the petitioner and it follows that the conviction under section 357 clause 1 of the city municipal act for failure
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTC.P. Matthen and Others Vs. District Magistrate, Trivandrum and Anothe ...
Court : Privy Council
Decided on : Apr-03-1939
an application for a reference to the local government under section 8 a extradition act while this application was in course of the travancore penal code corresponding to ss 409 418 420 477 a 109 and 114 i p c committed in by the resident for the madras states under s 7 indian extradition act 15 of 1903 to the chief presidency magistrate 480 and also ss 99 and 101 of the travancore penal code corresponding to ss 409 418 420 477 a 109 and also ss 99 and 101 of the travancore penal code corresponding to ss 409 418 420 477 a 109 and
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTJagdish NaraIn Bajpai Vs. Emperor Through Ram Gopal and ors.
Court : Allahabad
Decided on : Dec-11-1939
Reported in : AIR1940All178
that is implied by the reference to a summons in section 205 it appears to me that it was clearly within resident of benares jagdish narain made a complaint under sections 420 109 and 120 b i p c against four persons accused in the meerut conspiracy case under section 121 a penal code a non bailable offence was in custody and he accused in the meerut conspiracy case under section 121 a penal code a non bailable offence was in custody and he in the meerut conspiracy case under section 121 a penal code a non bailable offence was in custody and he had
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTRoshan Singh Vs. Emperor Through Sampuran Singh Tandon
Court : Allahabad
Decided on : Oct-04-1939
Reported in : AIR1941All87
should be close resemblance to constitute an offence under this section agreeing with the principle laid down in lokumal v emperor allowed in part the conviction and sentence under section 486 penal code are set aside the fine if paid shall be now proceed to examine the statutory provision under section 478 penal code a mark used for denoting that goods are the in part the conviction and sentence under section 486 penal code are set aside the fine if paid shall be refunded
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTAlluri China Bapanna and ors. Vs. Sri Mattangi Jaggiah Alias Jaggarao ...
Court : Chennai
Decided on : Jan-24-1939
Reported in : AIR1939Mad818; (1939)2MLJ214
of performance can be validly made by a promisor under section 38 of the indian contract act and by accepting the regard to the provisions contained in section 90 of the indian trusts act he held them to be constructive trustees and the interest claimed was not in the nature of a penalty and being of the opinion that the costs should be this suit under the provisions of section 11 of the code of civil procedure this criticism was perfectly justified but the
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT