Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 3 of 3 (0.16 seconds)
Shaik Ayyub vs The State Of Telangana on 4 July, 2022 cites

S.Harinath vs State Of Ap on 18 December, 2019

In this regard, relying on the decision rendered by the High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati in Jaganath Enterprises, Eluru v. State of A.P., through SHO, Pamur P.S., Prakasam District2, learned counsel for the petitioner herein would submit that the complaints/charge sheets lacks the ingredients of offence under Section -353 of IPC and, therefore, the proceedings for the said offence are also liable to be quashed.
Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati Cites 53 - Cited by 18 - Full Document

Durgacharan Misra vs State Of Orissa & Ors on 27 August, 1987

9. Further, in Durgacharan v. State of Orissa3, the Hon'ble Apex Court held that under Section - 353 of IPC, the ingredients of assault or use of criminal force while the public servant is doing his 2 . 2020 (1) ALT (Crl) 215 3 . AIR 1966 SC 1775 KL,J Crl.P. No.370 of 2021 & batch 5 duty as such is necessary. It was also held that mere use of force, however, is not enough to bring an Act within the terms of Section 353 of IPC. It has further to be shown that force was used intentionally to any person without that person's consent in order to commit an offence or with the intention or with the knowledge that the use of force will cause injury, fear or annoyance to the person against whom the force is used. In the case on hand, perusal of the record would reveal that there were no injuries caused out of the force alleged to have used by the petitioner injuries were caused.
Supreme Court of India Cites 5 - Cited by 267 - K J Shetty - Full Document
1