<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1893 (2) TMI 1 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=273563</link>
    <description>Section 511 of the Indian Penal Code covers a series of acts done towards the commission of an offence, not only the final act immediately before completion. On the evidence, the accused went beyond mere preparation by using false letters of administration, making inquiries, and forwarding documents intended to influence the person to be deceived; coupled with guilty intent, these acts were capable of amounting to an attempt to cheat. The distinction between preparation and attempt depended on the facts, and the jury was entitled to find that the criminal attempt had begun. The conviction was upheld and no basis was shown for a Privy Council reference.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 24 Feb 1893 00:00:00 +0521</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Jul 2018 16:33:39 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=525458" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1893 (2) TMI 1 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=273563</link>
      <description>Section 511 of the Indian Penal Code covers a series of acts done towards the commission of an offence, not only the final act immediately before completion. On the evidence, the accused went beyond mere preparation by using false letters of administration, making inquiries, and forwarding documents intended to influence the person to be deceived; coupled with guilty intent, these acts were capable of amounting to an attempt to cheat. The distinction between preparation and attempt depended on the facts, and the jury was entitled to find that the criminal attempt had begun. The conviction was upheld and no basis was shown for a Privy Council reference.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 24 Feb 1893 00:00:00 +0521</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=273563</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>