<?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>1986 (3) TMI 346 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=298550</link>
    <description>A pledge creates a bailment-like entrustment, so pledged jewellery may remain entrusted property for the limited purpose of securing the debt. On the complaint and accompanying material, the Delhi HC held that the alleged auction of the pledged jewellery prima facie disclosed dishonest disposal capable of constituting criminal breach of trust under Section 406 IPC, and proceedings could continue against the petitioners concerned. Applying the limited scope of inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC, the Court found the material insufficient against J.R.D. Tata, but adequate against the other petitioners. The complaint was therefore quashed only as to the Chairman and sustained against the remaining accused.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 05 Mar 1986 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 09 Nov 2021 11:08:16 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=660573" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1986 (3) TMI 346 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=298550</link>
      <description>A pledge creates a bailment-like entrustment, so pledged jewellery may remain entrusted property for the limited purpose of securing the debt. On the complaint and accompanying material, the Delhi HC held that the alleged auction of the pledged jewellery prima facie disclosed dishonest disposal capable of constituting criminal breach of trust under Section 406 IPC, and proceedings could continue against the petitioners concerned. Applying the limited scope of inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC, the Court found the material insufficient against J.R.D. Tata, but adequate against the other petitioners. The complaint was therefore quashed only as to the Chairman and sustained against the remaining accused.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 05 Mar 1986 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=298550</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>