Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 9 of 9 (0.22 seconds)
Smt. Sangeeta Chaturvedi vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 8 January, 2013 cites

Shaikh Noor Mohamad Shaikh Fazal vs The State Of Maharashtra on 28 August, 1980

7. After considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties I am of the view that the contention raised by the learned counsel for the applicant appears to be correct. Hon'ble the Apex Court in the case of Shaikh (supra) has specifically held that such type of mark sheet etc. which are required for admission or appointment to any job cannot be described as a valuable security, and therefore basically no offence under Section 467 of IPC is made out. However, the offence under Section 465 of IPC shall be made out against the applicant, whereas the remaining offences under Sections 420, 468 and 471 of IPC shall also be made out, and since the offences under Section 468 and 471 of IPC are triable by the Court of Sessions, therefore it is not necessary that the case may be remanded back under Section 228 of Cr.P.C. The trial Court may proceed with the case by simply modification of charges that the charge of offence under Section 467 of IPC may be reduced to the charge of offence under Section 465 of 4 Cr.R. No.946 of 2012 IPC, whereas the remaining charges shall remain unaltered.
Supreme Court of India Cites 9 - Cited by 5 - A C Gupta - Full Document
1