Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 14 (0.29 seconds)
N.Musthafa vs Union Territory Of Lakshadweep on 5 April, 2022 cites

Satis Chandra Ckakrabarti vs Ram Dayal De on 13 July, 1920

In Satis Chandra Chakravarti v. Ram Dayal De MANU/WB/0191/1920 : 24 C.W.N. 982 it was held by Full Bench of the Calcutta High Court that where the maker of a single statement is guilty of two distinct offences, one under s. 211, Indian Penal Code, which is an offence against public justice, and the other an offence under s. 499, wherein the personal element largely predominates, the offence under the latter section can be taken cognizance of without the sanction of the court concerned, as the Criminal procedure Code has not provided for sanction of court for taking cognizance of that offence. It was said that the two offences being fundamentally distinct in nature, could be separately taken cognizance of. That they are distinct in character is patent from the fact that the former is made non-compoundable, while the latter remains compoundable; in one for the initiation of the proceedings the legislature requires the sanction of the court under s. 195, Criminal Procedure Code, while in the other, Crl.M.C.No.1703 of 2021 14 cognizance can be taken of the offence on the complaint of the person defamed.
Calcutta High Court Cites 36 - Cited by 54 - Full Document
1   2 Next