Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 2 of 2 (0.24 seconds)
Documents citing Emperor vs Hari Ramji Pavar on 11 January, 1918

State vs Shantibai And Anr. on 18 January, 1960

4. The learned Deputy Government Advocate has placed a number of rulings such as Emperor v. Hari Ramji, 9 Born LR 27; The Queen v. Shura-ffooddeen, 13 Suth WR Cr 26; and In the matter of Ramjoy Kurmokar, 25 Suth WR Cr 10. About the principles enunciated in thece decisions, there cannot be two opinions. Once a person is found in possession of stolen property, certain presumptions follow and he is on exp'anation, at the risk of being otherwise convicted either for the theft or under Section 411 I. P. C. But then it should already be stolen property (for the purpose of Section 411), that is, the Court should be able to come to the conclusion that the offence of theft or criminal misappropriation has been committed in respect of it. The difficulty here is that there is no material on which the Court could arrive at this finding.
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 3 - Cited by 1 - Full Document
1