It is strenuously urged that to consider a foreigner guilty under the Penal Code for an offence committed in India though attributable to him and to punish him therefor in a case where he is not corporeally present in India for the commission of the offence, would be to give extra territorial operation to the Indian Penal Code and that an interpretation which brings such extra-territorial operation must be avoided.
A conviction would be valid even if there is any omission or irregularity in the charge, provided it did not occasion a failure of justice. (2011) 1 SCALE 114 : (2011) […]
A person commits an offence if—
(a)the person holds another person in slavery or servitude and the circumstances are such that the person knows or ought to know that the other person is held in slavery or servitude, or
(b)the person requires another person to perform forced or compulsory labour and the circumstances are such that the person knows or ought to know that the other person is being required to perform forced or compulsory labour.
Hitesh Verma vs The State of Uttarakhand & Anr (05-11-2020) – Offence under the Act is not established merely on the fact that the informant is a member of Scheduled Caste unless there is an intention to humiliate a member of Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe for the reason that the victim belongs to such caste. In the present case, the parties are litigating over possession of the land. The allegation of hurling of abuses is against a person who claims title over the property. If such person happens to be a Scheduled Caste, the offence under Section 3(1)(r) of the Act is not made out.
The clear position therefore is that any Judicial Magistrate, before taking cognizance of the offence, can order investigation under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. If he does so, he is not to examine the complainant on oath because he was not taking cognizance of any offence therein. For the purpose of enabling the police to start investigation it is open to the Magistrate to direct the police to register an FIR.
Evidence Act-Section 137 does not say that such cross-examination has to be limited only to what has been stated by the prosecution witness in examination-in-chief. AIR 1961 SC 175 : (1961) 1 […]
Narain and others Vs State of Punjab– The test is whether he is a witness “essential to the unfolding of the narrative on which the prosecution is based”. Whether a witness is so essential or […]
Distinction between illegality and irregularity vs express prohibition and express provision in Cr.P.C
What is Justice – The essence of the matter does not lie there. It is embedded in broader considerations of justice that cannot be reduced to a set formula of words or […]
The Crown Court
The Course of the Trial
Pakalapati Narayana Gajapathi Raju and others Vs Bonapalli Peda Appadu and another– Section 439 has been interpreted in several decisions of this Court which have taken the view that the revisional jurisdiction, when invoked by […]
Sec- 401- High Court’s Powers of Criminal Revision (1) In the case of any proceeding the record of which has been called for by itself or which otherwise comes to its […]