https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=274437 The HC dismissed the petition, affirming the Ld. ASJ's decision to uphold charges under section 406 IPC. The court clarified that a second revision petition is barred under section 397(3) Cr.P.C., but inherent powers under section 482 Cr.P.C. and Article 227 can be invoked in exceptional cases. The court found no misuse of process or miscarriage of justice to warrant such intervention. It determined the complaint was filed within the limitation period under section 468(2)(c) Cr.P.C. and confirmed the element of 'entrustment' in the criminal breach of trust, as the accused failed to return the property despite requests. en-us Mon, 30 Jan 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 24 Feb 2024 10:14:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=274437 The HC dismissed the petition, affirming the Ld. ASJ's decision to uphold charges under section 406 IPC. The court clarified that a second revision petition is barred under section 397(3) Cr.P.C., but inherent powers under section 482 Cr.P.C. and Article 227 can be invoked in exceptional cases. The court found no misuse of process or miscarriage of justice to warrant such intervention. It determined the complaint was filed within the limitation period under section 468(2)(c) Cr.P.C. and confirmed the element of 'entrustment' in the criminal breach of trust, as the accused failed to return the property despite requests. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 30 Jan 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=274437