TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Join Channel
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) Whether the conviction for murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code could be sustained on the evidence adduced. (ii) Whether the accused was liable under the latter part of Section 201 of the Indian Penal Code for giving false information with intent to screen the offender from legal punishment, and whether the information had to be given only to the police or a Magistrate.
Issue (i): Whether the conviction for murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code could be sustained on the evidence adduced.
Analysis: The evidence of the alleged accomplice was treated with caution and found unreliable in material particulars. The other witness whose testimony was relied on did not furnish dependable corroboration. On the whole evidence, the Court was not satisfied that the prosecution had proved the charge of murder to the standard required in a grave criminal case.
Conclusion: The conviction for murder was not sustained.
Issue (ii): Whether the accused was liable under the latter part of Section 201 of the Indian Penal Code for giving false information with intent to screen the offender from legal punishment, and whether the information had to be given only to the police or a Magistrate.
Analysis: Section 201 was construed as reaching a person who, knowing or having reason to believe that an offence had been committed, gives false information with the intention of screening the offender. The provision was treated as covering conduct analogous to an accessory after the fact and was held not to be confined to information given only to the police or a Magistrate. Information given to a person interested in bringing the offender to justice was sufficient if the requisite intent was proved. On the facts, the accused had given false information to a person so interested and had thereby laid a false trail.
Conclusion: The accused was held guilty under the latter part of Section 201 of the Indian Penal Code.
Final Conclusion: The conviction for murder was set aside and substituted by a conviction for giving false information to screen the offender, with the sentence correspondingly reduced.
Ratio Decidendi: For the latter part of Section 201 of the Indian Penal Code, it is enough if a person, knowing or having reason to believe that an offence has been committed, gives false information to someone interested in bringing the offender to justice with intent to screen the offender; the provision is not confined to information given to the police or a Magistrate.
TaxTMI 
