<?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>1985 (3) TMI 60 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40044</link>
    <description>Stridhan of a Hindu married woman remains her absolute property even after it is kept in the matrimonial home or entrusted to the husband or his relations; they hold it in a fiduciary capacity and must return it on demand. Dishonest retention or refusal to return such property can therefore disclose criminal breach of trust, and the availability of a civil remedy does not exclude criminal liability. A complaint alleging entrustment, misappropriation and refusal to return jewellery, clothing and other personal articles cannot be quashed at the threshold if those averments, taken as true, make out the offence. A dissenting view considered the property jointly possessed absent distinct entrustment.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 12 Mar 1985 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 31 Jul 2014 08:24:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=78590" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1985 (3) TMI 60 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40044</link>
      <description>Stridhan of a Hindu married woman remains her absolute property even after it is kept in the matrimonial home or entrusted to the husband or his relations; they hold it in a fiduciary capacity and must return it on demand. Dishonest retention or refusal to return such property can therefore disclose criminal breach of trust, and the availability of a civil remedy does not exclude criminal liability. A complaint alleging entrustment, misappropriation and refusal to return jewellery, clothing and other personal articles cannot be quashed at the threshold if those averments, taken as true, make out the offence. A dissenting view considered the property jointly possessed absent distinct entrustment.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 12 Mar 1985 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40044</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>