Remember | Register | Forgot Password?
Bookmark This Page   RSS Feeds  Follow On Twitter

 

Search for Lawyers          
    

Home > Experts > Criminal Law > Section 468, 420, 506 of ipc



Please Wait ..

Section 468, 420, 506 of ipc (Criminal Law)

Report Abuse
This query is : Resolved


Author : sadiq pasha

Posted On 22 August 2011 at 23:31

i want the deatels of the ipc sections 420, 468, 506. in which conditions those sections was applicable. and punishments. whats the role of police officers in the above sections investgations matter.




Expert : n.k.sarin

Posted On 23 August 2011 at 07:39

all the above section belongs to the serious offence. and the investigating officer ,who is investigating the case has right for inquerry and has power to arrest.



Expert : Advocate Rajkumarlaxman

Posted On 23 August 2011 at 08:06

Section 468. Forgery for purpose of cheating



Whoever commits forgery, intending that the 1[document or Electronic Record forged] shall be used for the purpose of cheating, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.


CLASSIFICATION OF OFFENCE



Punishment—Imprisonment for 7 years and fine—Cognizable—Non-bailable—-Triable by Magistrate of the first class—Non-compound­able.





Section 420. Cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property



Whoever cheats and thereby dishonestly induces the person deceived any property to any person, or to make, alter or destroy the whole or any part of a valuable security, or anything which is signed or sealed, and which is capable of being converted into a valuable security, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.



CLASSIFICATION OF OFFENCE



Punishment—Imprisonment for 7 years and fine—Cognizable—Non-bail­able—Triable by Magistrate of the first class—Compoundable by the person cheated with the permission of the court.



Comments



Ingredients



(i) Even if the allegation made in the complaint are accepted to be true and correct, the appellants cannot be said to have committed any offence of cheating. Since the appellants were not in picture at all the time when the complainant alleges to have spent money in improving the bottling plant, neither any guilty intention can be attributed to them nor there can possibly be any intention on their part to deceive complainant; Ajay Mitra v. State of Madhya Pradesh, AIR 2003 SC 1069.



(ii) The offence of cheating is established when the accused thereby induced that person to deliver any property or to do or to omit to do something which he would otherwise not have done or omitted; Mahadeo Prasad v. State of Bengal, AIR 1954 SC 724.




Section 506. Punishment for criminal intimidation



Whoever commits, the offence of criminal intimidation shall be punished with imprison­ment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both;



If threat be to cause death or grievous hurt, etc.—And if the threat be to cause death or grievous hurt, or to cause the destruction of any property by fire, or to cause an offence punishable with death or 1[imprisonment for life], or with imprisonment for a term which may extend to seven years, or to impute, unchastity to a woman, shall be punished with imprison­ment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, or with fine, or with both.



CLASSIFICATION OF OFFENCE



Para I



Punishment—Imprisonment for 2 years, or fine, or both—Non-cognizable-Bailable—Triable by any Magistrate—Compoundable by the person intimidated.



Para II



Punishment—Imprisonment for 7 years, or fine, or both—Non-cognizable—Bailable—Triable by Magistrate of the first class—Non-compoundable.



State Amendment



Uttar Pradesh



Imprisonment of 7 years, or fine or both—Cognizable—Non-bailable—Triable by Magistrate of the first class—Non-compoundable.



Vide Notification No. 777/VIII 9-4(2)—87, dated 31st July, 1989, published in U.P. Gazette, Extra., Pt. A, Sec. (kha), dated 2nd August, 1989.



comments



Threat to reputation



Where criminal intimidation was committed by threatening X and his daughter with injury to their reputation by having the indecent photographs published; the intent mentioned was to cause alarm to X and his daughter, hence the appellant was clearly guilty of the criminal intimidation and it was held that the conviction of the appellant under section 506 is correct; Romesh Chandra v. State, AIR 1960 SC 154.



Expert : K.S.Srinivas

Posted On 23 August 2011 at 09:43

Advocate Rajkumarlaxmanan extracted the relevant sections and clearly explained to the queriest.



Expert : prabhakar singh

Posted On 23 August 2011 at 12:48

good work already done 4u



Expert : shastri j.k.

Posted On 23 August 2011 at 13:56

You go immediate to perchage the book of ipc



Expert : girish shringi

Posted On 27 August 2011 at 19:09

Thanks.
Mr.Rajkumsrlaxman to provide detailed sections for the benefit of viewers.



Expert : Advocate. Arunagiri

Posted On 27 August 2011 at 21:12

I agree with the views of Mr.Shastri.


Previous

Next

You need to be the querist or approved Lawyersclubindia expert to take part in this query .


Click here to login ( Members Login ) now







Similar Queries :










Quick Links



Browse By Category



Subscribe to Experts Feed
Enter your email to receive Experts Updates:







web analytics