Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 12 (0.24 seconds)
Mohammed Haneefa Peeru Mohammed vs State Of Kerala Represented By The on 5 September, 2011 cites

V.V.L.N. Chary And Ors. vs N.A. Martin And Anr. on 23 April, 1982

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contended that no offence under Section 420 IPC will attract against the petitioner, since Dubai Government finally decided the matter there. Since the transaction between petitioner and company was a pure business transaction, the dishonor of cheque will not prima facie make out an offence under Section 420 IPC. Petitioner relied the decision of Chary V. Martin 1982 KLT 427, it was held as follows;
Kerala High Court Cites 9 - Cited by 9 - Full Document

Mohamed Rafy vs State Of Kerala on 24 March, 2009

Therefore, the above Section shows that, when an offence committed by a person outside India as described in Section 188, he can be dealt with at any place on which he is found. In such a situation, it does not matter whether he will come voluntarily or in answer to summons or under illegal arrest. This section mandates for the compliance of procedural formalities mentioned under Section 4 of Indian Penal Code and other penal laws which have extraterritorial application. The object of insisting the sanction of Central Government appears to prevent the accused person being tried over again for the same offence in two different places. This object is secured by refusing to extradite the offender, if he is wanted for being tried in a foreign country, subsequent to his trial in an Indian court, or by refusing to sanction the prosecution against him if he has been already tried in a foreign Crl.M.C. No.1055 of 2010 8 country in respect of the same offence. If the person has been convicted and sentenced to nominal punishment or has been acquitted after a colourable trial in a foreign court, and if he is afterwards found here in India, the Central Government might give the sanction to prosecute him in an Indian court for the same offence. The rule regarding sanction for the prosecution prevents a person from being tried twice for the commission of the same offence and ensures that person is not able to take advantage of a sham or colourable trial in a foreign country in order to avoid being tried here for that offence. The Central Government before granting sanction under Section 188 would take into account all aspects of the case. A Division Bench of this court in Mohamed V. State of Kerala (1994)1 KLT 464 held that police can investigate into a crime committed in a foreign country.
Kerala High Court Cites 11 - Cited by 1 - Full Document
1   2 Next