Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 11 (0.25 seconds)S.W. Palanitkar And Ors vs State Of Bihar And Anr on 18 October, 2001
34. However, in case of S.W. Palanitkar and Ors. vs. State of Bihar and
Anr.: (2002) 1 SCC 241 the Hon‟ble Supreme Court has held that "in order
to constitute an offence of cheating, the intention to deceive should be in
existence at the time when the inducement was made. It is necessary to show
that a person had fraudulent or dishonest intention at the time of making the
promise, to say that he committed an act of cheating." Thus, it is held that
the essential ingredient for committing an offence under section 420 IPC,
"mens rea" is an essential ingredient.
C.K. Jaffer Sharief vs State (Thr C.B.I.) on 9 November, 2012
In case of C.K. Jaffer Sharief vs. State (CBI): (2013) 1 SCC 205
whereby held that "dishonest intention is the gist of the offence under
section 13(1)(d) is implicit in the words used i.e. corrupt or illegal means
Crl.M.C.4956/2017 Page 20 of 23
and abuse of position as a public servant. To make a person criminally
accountable it must be proved that an act, which is forbidden by law, has
been caused by his conduct, and that the conduct was accompanied by a
legally blameworthy attitude of mind. Thus, there are two components of
every crime, a physical element and a mental element, usually called actus
reus and mens rea respectively."
Cbi, Hyderabad vs K. Narayana Rao on 21 September, 2012
Ramesh Rajagopal vs Devi Polymers Pvt. Ltd on 19 April, 2016
37. Moreover, in case of Ramesh Rajagopal vs. Devi Polymers Pvt. Ltd.:
Chilakamarthi Venkateswarlu And ... vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh And Another on 30 August, 2018
33. I am conscious about the directions of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in
Chilakamarthi Venkateswarlu & Anr. (Supra) vide order dated 31.07.2019
whereby "the power to quash the proceedings is generally exercised when
there is no material to proceed against the Petitioners even if the allegations
in the complaint are prima facie accepted as true."