Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 16 (0.30 seconds)Section 463 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 464 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 25 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Emperor vs Abu Hasan on 12 February, 1919
13. This consideration ought not to weigh with a Court which has to interpret the section of the Penal Code as it finds it. In Emperor v. Ali Hasan [1906] 28 All. 358 it was held by Richards, J., that it was forgery to issue orders as if signed by the District Superintendent of Police when they were not so signed. The learned Judge observes at page 364 (28 All.)
It would certainly be an alarming state of the law it a man could deliberately fabricate a false order for the purpose of having another person arrested under the supported authority of a District Superintendent of Police and be guilty of no offence under the Penal Code.
Queen-Empress vs Pershad And Ors. on 17 January, 1885
In Queen v. Kishen Pershad 2 N.W.P. 202 it was held that a prosecutor in order to establish that a title has bean asserted with a fraudulent or dishonest intent must show that the accused had no reasonable ground for asserting the title. The learned Judges observe:
Manikkam Alias Manika Asari vs Emperor on 3 August, 1909
6. Mr. Vaz relies very strongly upon the judgment of Ayling, J., in Manika Asari v. Emperor [1915] M.W.N. 278. In that casa a material alteration was made in a document. The Sessions Judge found that the material alteration did support the claim of the appellant in that case. The conviebion was set aside by Ayling, J., on the ground that it was impossible to say that any wrongful result was intended or could have arisen. With very great respect to the learned Judge I am unable to follow his reasoning. Before discussing the reasons given by the Judge it is but fair to observe that soma of the cases which bear on the point were not brought to his notice. The learned Judge observes:
Lolit Mohan Sarkar vs The Queen-Empress on 2 November, 1894
515 (note) and Lalit Mohan Sarkar v. Queen-Empress [1895] 22 Cal. 313.
Queen-Empress vs Sheo Dayal on 6 March, 1885
In Queen-Empress v. Sheo Dayal [1885] 7 All. 459, Brodhurst, J., sitting as a single Judge observed: