Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 10 (0.82 seconds)
Ramesh Chand Verma vs Bhagat Ram on 29 September, 1972 cites

Fateh Singh vs Emperor Through Bishamber Sahai on 20 September, 1939

To the same effect are the followimg cases: Fateh Singh v. Emperor AIR 194 All 92 : 41 Cri LJ 325; Debendra Natk Sen v. Rajendra Roy ; Hiralal Chowdhry v. State . The last cited case deals with the point very exhaustively and also the previous authorities are reviewed. It was held that Section 181 (2) Criminal Procedure Code when it gives right of trial to a court where the property is received or retained clearly contemplates suck reception or retention by virtue of which the ofl'ence of criminal breach of trust should possibly be perpetrated. It was also held that the non-accounting is no part of criminal breach of trust. It is really the result or consequence resulting from criminal misappropriation. It is a fact which might either be lost or may result in non-accounting but that would not make it an ingredient of offence itself. On the above grounds it was held that the courts where the accounts had to be rendered had no jurisdiction to try the case.
Allahabad High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 6 - Full Document

Debendra Nath Sen vs Rajendra Chandra Roy on 6 January, 1955

To the same effect are the followimg cases: Fateh Singh v. Emperor AIR 194 All 92 : 41 Cri LJ 325; Debendra Natk Sen v. Rajendra Roy ; Hiralal Chowdhry v. State . The last cited case deals with the point very exhaustively and also the previous authorities are reviewed. It was held that Section 181 (2) Criminal Procedure Code when it gives right of trial to a court where the property is received or retained clearly contemplates suck reception or retention by virtue of which the ofl'ence of criminal breach of trust should possibly be perpetrated. It was also held that the non-accounting is no part of criminal breach of trust. It is really the result or consequence resulting from criminal misappropriation. It is a fact which might either be lost or may result in non-accounting but that would not make it an ingredient of offence itself. On the above grounds it was held that the courts where the accounts had to be rendered had no jurisdiction to try the case.
Calcutta High Court Cites 9 - Cited by 2 - Full Document
1