https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277399 Previous consent under Section 270(1) of the Government of India Act, 1935 was required only if the alleged act was done or purported to be done in execution of official duty. A charge of criminal breach of trust under Section 409 IPC, based on secret misappropriation, did not ordinarily attract that protection, so no prior consent was needed. Falsification of accounts under Section 477-A IPC could amount to an act ostensibly done in the course of official duty, so prior consent was required. The two charges could be jointly tried, but the defect affecting the falsification charge required that part of the proceedings be quashed and the remaining charge reconsidered on rehearing. en-us Wed, 12 Apr 1939 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 03 Dec 2018 14:46:56 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277399 Previous consent under Section 270(1) of the Government of India Act, 1935 was required only if the alleged act was done or purported to be done in execution of official duty. A charge of criminal breach of trust under Section 409 IPC, based on secret misappropriation, did not ordinarily attract that protection, so no prior consent was needed. Falsification of accounts under Section 477-A IPC could amount to an act ostensibly done in the course of official duty, so prior consent was required. The two charges could be jointly tried, but the defect affecting the falsification charge required that part of the proceedings be quashed and the remaining charge reconsidered on rehearing. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 12 Apr 1939 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277399