Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 10 (0.62 seconds)Section 238 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 427 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 426 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 32 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
Section 225 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 33 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
Section 232 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 379 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Kanhaiyalal vs Feliram on 22 January, 1951
3. It was sought to be urged before me on the petitioners' side that offences under Sections 427 and 447, I.P.C. were not cognate offences, and so Section 238, Cr. P. C. had no application. He relied on Kanhaiyalal v. Feliram, AIR 1952 Madh B. 15 which related to a case in which charges had been framed under Sections 426 and 379, I.P.C. but in which conviction was ultimately based on Section 447, I.P.C. His Lordship held that the ingredients of mischief and criminal trespass were completely different from each other and hence a person charged with mischief could not be convicted for criminal trespass, because the accused would be prejudiced in making his defence. His Lordship further observed.
1