Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: code of criminal procedure 1973 section 220 Page 1 of about 107,921 results (0.452 seconds)

Dec 21 1984 (HC)

Mohan Mallu Rathod and ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 1985(2)BomCR633

..... offence and persons accused of abetment or of an attempt to commit such offence may be charged and tried together.'sections 235 and 239 of the code of criminal procedure, 1898 are analogous to sections 220 and 223 of the code of criminal procedure, 1973. the application exhibits 109 and 114 therefore, were rightly rejected by the learned special judge.17. by the applications ..... nos. 2 and 3 was accorded by the government of maharashtra in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (b) of sub-section (1) and sub-section (3) of section 197 of the code of criminal procedure, 1973, and section 6(1)(b) of the prevention of corruption act. the first paragraph of the preamble of the sanction reads as follows :---' ..... application to trial before the special judge all the provisions contained in the code of criminal procedure relating to joinder of charges. these provisions find place in sections 218 to 224 of the code of criminal procedure, 1973. these provisions are analogous to sections 233 to 240 of the code of criminal procedure, 1898. by making these provisions applicable to trials before the special judge ..... exhibits 111 and 131 (annexures e and g respectively to the petition) the petitioners pleaded bar of limitation under section 161(1) of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 09 2012 (HC)

Gunjan Sinha JaIn and Others Vs. Registrar General, High Court of Delh ...

Court : Delhi

..... behalf of the petitioners that none of the options is correct. on the other hand, the learned counsel for the dhc drew our attention to the provisions of section 220(1) of the code of criminal procedure, 1973 to support the fact that the answer key shows option (2) [he shall be charged with every such offence and tried at one trial for all the offences ..... ] as the right answer. 17. section 220 of the code of criminal procedure, 1973, so much as is relevant, reads as under:- 220. trial for more than one offence. (1) if, in one series of acts so connected together as to form the same transaction, more offences ..... with compounding of offences. sub-section (1) gives the list of offences which do not require the permission of the court before which the prosecution is pending ..... ? (1) section 298 of the ipc. (2) section 426 of the ipc. (3) section 491 of the ipc. (4) section 388 of the ipc. 18. according to the answer key, answer (4) is the correct answer. however, the petitioners contend that the question itself is wrong as none of the four options are correct. to decide this, we have to look at section 320 of the code of criminal procedure, 1973 which deals .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 08 2013 (SC)

Amitbhai Anilchandra Shah Vs. the Central Bureau of Investigation and ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

..... that even the charges will have to be framed jointly and one trial will have to be held as contemplated under section 220 of the code of criminal procedure, 1973 (in short the code). it is further pointed out that as per the cbi, the alleged criminal conspiracy commenced when sohrabuddin and kausarbi (whose deaths were in question in the first fir) and tulsiram prajapati (whose death was ..... fir by the cbi is contrary to various decisions of this court. b) the various provisions of the code of criminal procedure clearly show that an officer-in-charge of a police station has to commence investigation as provided in section 156 or 157 of the code on the basis of entry of the first information report, on coming to know of the commission of ..... prajapati were part of the very same conspiracy and in the same series of acts so connected together that they will have to be tried in one trial under section 220 of the code. 29) after the investigation of the second fir, the cbi filed chargesheet dated 04.09.2012 wherein, among others, petitioner-amit shah was also arrayed as one of the ..... and kausarbi took place. (ii) all the three killings are part of the same conspiracy. (iii) trial of all the three offences shall have to be one trial under section 220 of the code. (iv) cbi be given formal permission to investigate tulsiram prajapati killing as further investigation in the first fir filed by cbi which investigation was going on. (v) if cbi .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 08 2013 (SC)

Amitbhai Anilchandra Shah Vs. Cbi and anr.

Court : Supreme Court of India

..... that even the charges will have to be framed jointly and one trial will have to be held as contemplated under section 220 of the code of criminal procedure, 1973 (in short the code ). it is further pointed out that as per the cbi, the alleged criminal conspiracy commenced when sohrabuddin and kausarbi (whose deaths were in question in the first fir) and tulsiram prajapati (whose death was ..... fir by the cbi is contrary to various decisions of this court. b) the various provisions of the code of criminal procedure clearly show that an officer-in-charge of a police station has to commence investigation as provided in section 156 or 157 of the code on the basis of entry of the first information report, on coming to knot of the commission of ..... prajapati were part of the very same conspiracy and in the same series of acts so connected together that they will have to be tried in one trial under section 220 of the code. 29) after the investigation of the second fir, the cbi filed chargesheet dated 04.09.2012 wherein, among others, petitioner-amit shah was also arrayed as one of the ..... and kausarbi took place. (ii) all the three killings are part of the same conspiracy. (iii) trial of all the three offences shall have to be one trial under section 220 of the code. (iv) cbi be given formal permission to investigate tulsiram prajapati killing as further investigation in the first fir filed by cbi which investigation was going on. (v) if cbi .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 28 2010 (HC)

Mr.Aklak Ahmed FakruddIn Patel. Vs. State of Maharashtra

Court : Mumbai

..... under a single transaction or series of transactions the applicant can be tried in a single trial. section 220 of the criminal procedure code, 1973 (cr.p.c.) (which is identical to section 235 of the earlier criminal procedure code of 1898) relates to the trial for more than one offence and runs thus:220.trial for more than one offence. (1) if, in one series of acts so connected together ..... , in view of section 220(3), the accused could be tried and convicted in a single trial.19. in the case of shri sharan p. khanna vs. oil and natural gas corporation ltd., decided on 29th july 2010 in criminal writ petition no.1767 of 2007, this court held that the trial under section 138 of the negotiable instruments act and 420 ipc, which were ..... trial for the offence of murder and voluntarily causing hurt under sections 300 and 323 of the ipc was allowed. in that case upon the commission of murder, the accused came to be chased and was subsequently arrested ..... and 307 of the ipc as well as the offences under sections 148, 323 and 149 and 307 read with section 149 of the ipc could all be tried in one trial as they were in a series of acts connected together to form the same transaction.17. in the case of gorey lal vs. state of u.p., 1994 criminal law journal 1337, joint .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 16 2005 (HC)

Devinder Singh Negi and ors. Vs. Sunil Bhandari and ors.

Court : Delhi

Reported in : 118(2005)DLT746; I(2005)DMC688; 2005(81)DRJ740

..... bhandari v. devender singh negi and ors. pending in the court of judicial magistrate-i, kotdwar, district pouri gharwal, uttranchal.2. the petitioners invoke the provisions of sections 186 & 220 of the code of criminal procedure code, 1973 (in short `code') and says that the court in delhi and that in kotdwar have taken cognizance of the same offence and, thereforee, they ought to be enquired into or ..... delhi the fir in respect of the cruelty as well as demand for dowry have been rightly made in delhi.4. if an fir in respect of the offence under section 406 ipc being made in delhi, it could have been appropriate for this court to order a consolidation of the two firs but the complaint in respect of the offence under ..... section 406 ipc. the ingredients of the offence under section 406 ipc are entirely different from the ingredients of the offence under section 498a as well as under sections 3, 4 & 6 of dowry prohibition act. the petitioners' counsel says that both the complaints are virtually the ..... . from the nature of the two matters, the fir and the complaint case mentioned above, it is clear that the fir in delhi was in respect of an offence under section 498a ipc along with sections 3, 4 & 6 of dowry prohibition act whereas the complaint at kotdwar is made only in respect of the offence under .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 27 2001 (SC)

Surendra Singh Rautela @ Surendra Singh Bengali Vs. State of Bihar (No ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR2002SC260; 2002(1)ALD(Cri)270; 2002(1)BLJR710; (SCSuppl)2002(1)CHN55; 2002CriLJ555; 2002(1)Crimes191(SC); JT2001(10)SC152; 2001(8)SCALE298; (2002)1SCC266

..... that the high court was not justified in enhancing the punishment awarded against this appellant from imprisonment for life to death sentence as no appeal under section 377 of the code of criminal procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as 'the code') was filed by the state for enhancement of sentence. it has been further submitted that no opportunity of hearing was afforded to appellant surendra singh ..... person accused of them may be charged with and tried at one trial for each of such offences. thus, in view of the specific provisions engrafted under sub-section (3) of section 220 of the code, we have no option but to hold that the learned chief justice in the concurring judgment was not justified in holding that it was not permissible to try ..... it was not permissible in law to try appellant surendra singh rautela simultaneously for the offences under sections 302 of the penal code as well as 27(3) of the arms act as the same is contrary to the provisions of section 220 of the code. section 220 of the code lays down that if, in one series of acts so connected together as to form the same ..... transaction, more offences than one are committed by the same person, he may be charged with, and tried at one trial for, every such offence. sub-section (3) of section 220 of the code lays down that if the acts alleged constitute an offence falling within two or more separate definitions of any law in force for the time being by which .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 21 1998 (HC)

N. Lakshmanan and ors. Vs. Sri Shanmukha Cotton Traders and anr.,

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : 1998(2)ALT(Cri)494; [2000]102CompCas154(AP)

..... . for the sake of convenience, the facts in criminal petition no. 1497 of 1998 are taken into consideration for disposal of these petitions.2. criminal petition no. 1497 of 1998 is an application filed under section 482 of the code of criminal procedure, 1973 (for short 'the code'), to quash the proceedings in c. c. no ..... therefore the offence alleged to have been committed was in respect of single transaction and not in respect of different transactions.even otherwise section 220(1) of the criminal procedure code states that if one series of acts so connected together as to form the same transaction, more offences than one are committed by ..... herein to present all the cheques on a particular date which was done by the respondent/complainant in this case and so section 219(1) of the criminal procedure code is not attracted to the facts of the present case for the simple reason that the petitioner/ accused in this case ..... supreme court in municipal corporation of delhi v. ramkishan rohtagi, : 1983crilj159 . in the said decision, the supreme court referred to section 319 of the code dealing with the power to proceed against other person appearing to be guilty of offences and observed that the said provision gives ample powers ..... company. all the cheques were returned on only one day, i.e., march 10, 1997. therefore, the case on hand falls under section 220 of the code. the facts of the case on hand are similar and the point raised is squarely covered by a decision of the madras high court in .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 17 2004 (HC)

Mohammed Vs. State of Kerala

Court : Kerala

Reported in : II(2005)BC303; 2004(3)KLT330

..... the mind to decide whether offences can be reckoned as part of the same transaction. i shall only advert to the relevant passage.'it may be noticed that under section 220 of the code of criminal procedure, offences more than one committed by the same persons could be tried at one trial, if they can be held to be one series of acts, so as ..... of such offences, whether in respect of the same person or not, he may be charged with, and tried at one trial for, any number of them not exceeding three.section 220. trial for more than one offence.-- (1) if, in one series of acts so connected together as to form the same transaction, more offences than one are committed by the ..... section 218. it cannot hence be contended that section 219(1) must control section 220(1) also. the decision of the division bench of this court ..... easily be held to be offences committed in the course of same transaction. if that be so, section 220(1) squarely applies.10. a contention is raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner that section 219(1) must control section 220(1) also. i am unable to accept this contention. sections 219 and 220 lay down different and distinct exception to the general rule contemplated under .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 18 2001 (HC)

Jayaraj Vs. State of Kerala

Court : Kerala

Reported in : 2001(2)ALT(Cri)193

..... , forthwith discharge the person but otherwise shall direct that search be made. (4) no female shall be searched by anyone excepting a female. 7. it is clear from the aforesaid section that it has operation only to cases where search of a person is carried out under the provisions of ss. 41, 42 and 43 of the n.d.p.s ..... together as to form the same transaction, which are committed by the same person. one trial is sufficient for the two acts in such a case in view of s. 220(1) of the cr.p.c.17. the decision in balbir singh and beldev singh make it clear that once an officer comes to know that there is possibility of .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //