https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311708 Sections 235(1) and 239(d) of the Code of Criminal Procedure were held not to create an exception to Section 177 or to enlarge territorial jurisdiction for offences committed outside the court's local limits. The provisions were treated as enabling rules for joinder only, effective where jurisdiction already exists under law; they cannot be used to try out-of-jurisdiction overt acts merely because they were committed in pursuance of a conspiracy before the same court. A pardon granted in respect of an offence outside the court's jurisdiction was held invalid, while a pardon relating to the conspiracy charge within jurisdiction was valid. en-us Wed, 25 Mar 1959 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 09 Jan 2024 15:04:49 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311708 Sections 235(1) and 239(d) of the Code of Criminal Procedure were held not to create an exception to Section 177 or to enlarge territorial jurisdiction for offences committed outside the court's local limits. The provisions were treated as enabling rules for joinder only, effective where jurisdiction already exists under law; they cannot be used to try out-of-jurisdiction overt acts merely because they were committed in pursuance of a conspiracy before the same court. A pardon granted in respect of an offence outside the court's jurisdiction was held invalid, while a pardon relating to the conspiracy charge within jurisdiction was valid. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 25 Mar 1959 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311708