https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296283 Processes issued under Sections 87 and 88 CrPC were found to lack the required jurisdiction because they were not founded on a prior valid warrant, so convictions for rioting and common-object hurt under Sections 147 and 332/149 IPC could not stand. For wrongful confinement under Section 342 IPC, the convictions of two search witnesses were set aside for want of proof, while the remaining convictions were maintained on the evidence. The convictions under Section 332 IPC were altered to Section 323 IPC because hurt was proved, but obstruction of lawful duty was not, and the sentences were left undisturbed. en-us Wed, 21 Apr 1943 00:00:00 +0630 Tue, 13 Jul 2021 14:54:14 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296283 Processes issued under Sections 87 and 88 CrPC were found to lack the required jurisdiction because they were not founded on a prior valid warrant, so convictions for rioting and common-object hurt under Sections 147 and 332/149 IPC could not stand. For wrongful confinement under Section 342 IPC, the convictions of two search witnesses were set aside for want of proof, while the remaining convictions were maintained on the evidence. The convictions under Section 332 IPC were altered to Section 323 IPC because hurt was proved, but obstruction of lawful duty was not, and the sentences were left undisturbed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 21 Apr 1943 00:00:00 +0630 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296283