Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 26 (0.36 seconds)Section 420 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 468 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 471 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
The Indian Penal Code, 1860
State Of Chhattisgarh vs Bal Govind 11 Wpc/2062/2018 Ashok Das ... on 10 October, 2018
D. Discrepancies in CFSL Report
The CFSL report lacks clarity on methodology and authorship, failing to
address time-related handwriting changes or margin of error. It suggests
FIR No. 428/1993 State Vs. Mohan Kukreja
Digitally signed
RAHUL by RAHUL JAIN
Date:
Sheila Sebastian vs R.Jawaharaj on 11 May, 2018
Forgery: Sheila Sebastian v. R. Jawaharaj (2018) and Md. Ibrahim v. State
of Bihar (2009) emphasize that forgery requires proof of a false document
made by the accused, absent here.
Md.Ibrahim & Ors vs State Of Bihar & Anr on 4 September, 2009
7.2.3. The prosecution's reliance on Md. Ibrahim v. State of Bihar (2009) 8
SCC 751 is misplaced, as it requires proof of the accused's intent to deceive by
making or using a false document. Here, the mere use of the retirement deed in
civil court does not establish fraudulent intent without evidence of forgery by the
accused. Thus, the charges under Sections 420, 468, and 471 IPC are not proved.
Latesh @ Dadu Baburao Karlekar vs The State Of Maharashtra Home ... on 30 January, 2018
In light of Latesh v. State of Maharashtra (2018) 3 SCC 66, suspicion
cannot replace legal proof, and the prosecution must establish guilt beyond
reasonable doubt. The evidence presented falls short of this standard. Mohan
Kukreja and Madan Kukreja, against whom no specific evidence exists, are entitled
to acquittal.