Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 7 of 7 (0.21 seconds)Section 366A in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 386 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 34 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 60 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Amar Nath And Others vs State Of Haryana & Others on 29 July, 1977
14. The expression "interlocutory order" has been interpreted in the case of Amar Nath and Ors. v. State of Haryana and Ors., wherein it has been laid down that the interlocutory order denotes orders of a purely interim or temporary nature which do not decide or touch the important rights or the liabilities of the parties. Any order, which substantially affects the rights of the accused, or decide certain rights of the parties cannot bee said to an interlocutory order so as to bar a revision against that order.
Rajeev Chaudhary vs State (N.C.T.) Of Delhi on 4 May, 2001
10. The Supreme Court in the case of Rejeev Chaudhary v. State (NCT) of Delhi, while dealing with a case of an offence under Section 386, IPC held that since under Section 386, IPC punishment provided is imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to 10 years and also fine, the accused can be detained up to a period of 60 days and not 90 days. It was further held that the expression "not less than" would mean imprisonment should be 10 years or more and would cover only those offences for which punishment could be imprisonment for a clear period of 10 years or more.
1