<?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>1960 (11) TMI 143 - PATNA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469737</link>
    <description>Filing a forged document in court can amount to &quot;use&quot; under Section 471 IPC where it is fraudulently or dishonestly put forward as genuine in support of a claim, even if it is not ultimately exhibited or relied on in evidence. The commentary also states that proceedings under Section 476 CrPC are special and self-contained, so the power to direct a complaint remains confined to the court statutorily authorised to act; that jurisdiction cannot be enlarged by transfer under Section 24 CPC to a court that was neither the original court nor a proper successor. On that footing, the transferee court lacked jurisdiction to direct the complaint.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 23 Nov 1960 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 02 Jul 2026 11:39:49 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=909607" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1960 (11) TMI 143 - PATNA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469737</link>
      <description>Filing a forged document in court can amount to &quot;use&quot; under Section 471 IPC where it is fraudulently or dishonestly put forward as genuine in support of a claim, even if it is not ultimately exhibited or relied on in evidence. The commentary also states that proceedings under Section 476 CrPC are special and self-contained, so the power to direct a complaint remains confined to the court statutorily authorised to act; that jurisdiction cannot be enlarged by transfer under Section 24 CPC to a court that was neither the original court nor a proper successor. On that footing, the transferee court lacked jurisdiction to direct the complaint.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 23 Nov 1960 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469737</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>