https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196934 For a conviction under Section 201 IPC, punishment must be tied to the real offence actually committed and concealed, as known or believed by the accused, not to an assumed graver offence. The evidence showed concealment only of offences punishable under Sections 330 and 348, so the sentence could not be measured by culpable homicide under Section 304. The Court also stated that a single act of destroying evidence should not ordinarily attract separate punishments merely because it relates to more than one offence. The longer sentence imposed by the High Court was therefore not sustainable. en-us Thu, 03 Dec 1964 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 19 Dec 2017 15:29:50 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196934 For a conviction under Section 201 IPC, punishment must be tied to the real offence actually committed and concealed, as known or believed by the accused, not to an assumed graver offence. The evidence showed concealment only of offences punishable under Sections 330 and 348, so the sentence could not be measured by culpable homicide under Section 304. The Court also stated that a single act of destroying evidence should not ordinarily attract separate punishments merely because it relates to more than one offence. The longer sentence imposed by the High Court was therefore not sustainable. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 03 Dec 1964 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196934