Skip to main content

Law on Section 411 IPC

Image
By Vivek Nasa

 Understanding Section 411 IPC

By Vivek Nasa Associates


In the case of Trimbak vs. State of M.P. AIR 1954 SC 39, the Court clarified that to prove a charge under Section 411 of the IPC, the prosecution must establish:

  1. The accused was in possession of stolen property.

  2. Someone else had possession of the property before the accused.

  3. The accused knew or had reason to believe the property was stolen.

In this case, the prosecution failed to prove the accused knew the gold was stolen. The identity of the gold was also not confirmed, so it could not be classified as stolen property. Even if the accused received demand drafts and purchased gold bars, the prosecution needed to show the accused knew the drafts were obtained fraudulently or was part of a conspiracy.

Vivek Nasa Associates

Vivek Nasa Associates is a trusted criminal defense law firm in Gurugram, specializing in bail, anticipatory bail, court representation, and trial defense. Our expert lawyers handle cases like 498A, domestic violence, cybercrime, white-collar crimes, PMLA, and cheque bounce disputes.

If you need urgent bail assistance in Gurugram or legal help for cybercrime, IT offenses, or crimes against women, contact us today. We offer free consultations and are known as the best criminal defense lawyers near Gurugram District Court.

Visit Vivek Nasa Associates for reliable legal support in Gurugram.

Contact Vivek Nasa Associates Today

Are you looking for expert legal guidance on Will drafting, estate planning, or probate in Delhi, Noida, or Gurugram? At Vivek Nasa Associates, we are committed to helping you protect your legacy and secure your loved ones’ future.

Contact us today to schedule a consultation with our experienced lawyers. Let us help you navigate the complexities of probate with confidence and clarity.

 

Contact Information

Vivek Nasa Associates Address :

 

Labels:

Popular posts from this blog

Advocate Vivek Nasa on Motor Vehicle Act 1988 and Traffic Challans

By Vivek Nasa
Advocate Vivek Nasa on Motor Vehicle Act 1988 and Traffic Challans By Vivek Nasa FOR MORE INFORMATION CONTACT Vivek Nasa & Associates Chamber no 11, Second Floor, Lawyers Chambers Block A, Gurgaon Civil Court, National Highway 8, Gurugram, Haryana 122001, India  Get Directions Phone:   +91 9811896536 Website:   https://www.viveknasa.com Email:   contact@viveknasa.com Facebook Profile:  Visit Google Maps:  Visit Youtube Channel:  Visit  
Read more

Waiver of Cooling-Off Period for Mutual Consent Divorce in India

By Vivek Nasa
  Waiver of Cooling-Off Period for  Mutual Consent Divorce in India   By Vivek Nasa Associates The concept of  mutual consent divorce  was introduced in India to provide an amicable and less adversarial way for couples to end their marriage when they find it irreparable. Under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 , and similar provisions in other personal laws, couples can file for divorce by mutual consent  if they have been living separately for at least one year and agree that the marriage cannot be sustained. However, one of the most debated aspects of this provision is the mandatory “cooling-off period” of six months between the first and second motions for divorce . This raises the question: Can the cooling-off period for mutual consent divorce in India be waived off? Understanding the Cooling-Off Period The cooling-off period is a statutory requirement designed to give couples time to reconsider their decision to divorce . It acts as a safegua...
Read more

Law on Quashing of an FIR after a Chargesheet is Filed

By Vivek Nasa
It is a settled position of law that the High Court possesses inherent powers to quash criminal proceedings — including an FIR or charge-sheet — where the interest of justice so demands. This authority, now codified under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (previously Section 482 CrPC), is not curtailed merely by procedural developments such as the filing of a charge-sheet. In Shaileshbhai Ranchhodbhai Patel & Another v. State of Gujarat & Ors. , the Hon’ble Supreme Court reaffirmed that the High Court may exercise its inherent jurisdiction to quash an FIR and all consequential proceedings even after a charge-sheet has been filed, if the allegations — taken at face value — do not disclose the commission of any offence, or if the continuation of proceedings would amount to an abuse of the process of law or of the Court. In Joseph Salvaraj A. v. State of Gujarat & Ors. [(2011) 7 SCC 59], it was further clarified that the filing of a charge-sheet after the...
Read more