Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 14 (0.77 seconds)Section 477A in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 409 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
Section 342 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Section 109 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
The Indian Penal Code, 1860
Section 221 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Dalip Singh And Others vs State Of Punjab on 15 May, 1953
In this connection the
observations of this Court in the case of Dalip Singh v. State
of Punjab(1), and of the Federal Court in
(1) [1954] S.C.R. 145, 156.
I.G. Singleton vs Emperor on 7 November, 1924
This aspect of the matter has been well
discussed in a judgment of the Calcutta High Court delivered
by Mr. Justice Mukerji in the case of I. G. Singleton v. The
King-Emperor(2). The learned Judge has there pointed out
the difference between the position as it obtains in India
and that in England. The rule of English law as to the
acquittal of an alleged conspirator following from the
acquittal of the other when the conspiracy was said to be
only between the two and in a joint trial of both is based
upon a rule of practice and procedure, namely, that
repugnancy or contradiction on the face of the record is a
ground for annulling a conviction. But such a repugnancy is
not by itself a sufficient ground for quashing a conviction
in India where the matter is governed by statutory law both
as to the offence and the procedure for bringing the
offender to justice. In India there is no provision in the
statutory law justifying an interference with a conviction
on the
(1) [1902] 2 K.B. 339.