https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313523 A complaint was not vitiated where a company resolution authorised the Secretary to institute proceedings, and a belated objection to authority failed. Territorial jurisdiction lay at Kharar because, under Sections 179 and 182 CrPC, an offence of deception may be tried where the act occurs or its consequence ensues. The allegations of representation, inducement, and diversion of goods disclosed a prima facie case of cheating under Section 420 IPC, and the presence of a civil suit did not bar criminal prosecution where the ingredients of cheating were otherwise made out. The charge under Section 420 IPC was upheld. en-us Wed, 18 Mar 1987 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 19 Apr 2024 13:05:50 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313523 A complaint was not vitiated where a company resolution authorised the Secretary to institute proceedings, and a belated objection to authority failed. Territorial jurisdiction lay at Kharar because, under Sections 179 and 182 CrPC, an offence of deception may be tried where the act occurs or its consequence ensues. The allegations of representation, inducement, and diversion of goods disclosed a prima facie case of cheating under Section 420 IPC, and the presence of a civil suit did not bar criminal prosecution where the ingredients of cheating were otherwise made out. The charge under Section 420 IPC was upheld. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 18 Mar 1987 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313523