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
By Vivek Nasa
DIVORCE UNDER HINDU MARRIAGE ACT 1955 Marriage is one of the most significant institutions in our culture. However, as one of the most intricate partnerships, it is challenging to maintain , especially in today’s times where there is an increasing tendency to seek divorces. This is where the Hindu Marriage Act (HMA) assists in preserving marriages and families from disintegration.   The Hindu Marriage Act, which came into force in the year 1955, aims to establish uniformity of laws among Hindus. It provides the legal framework required for individuals to file for a divorce under the Hindu Marriage Act, as per the sections stipulated by the law.   Marriages are among the most complex relationships, laden with emotional and financial investments. The purpose of this act is to safeguard the rights of both the bride and the groom as per the Hindu Marriage Act.   Application of the Hindu Marriage Act   (1) This Act applies—   (a) To any person who is a Hindu by r...
Read more

Recovery of cheque bounce money becomes difficult: Change in Jurisdiction of Section 138 NI Act Cases : SC

By Vivek Nasa
By Vivek Nasa Recovery of cheque bounce money becomes difficult: Change in Jurisdiction of Section 138 NI Act Cases Landmark Judgement by Supreme Court of India changes the way Cheque Bounce Section 138 NI Act cases are filed. In a landmark judgement, the Supreme Court of India has changed he way Cheque Bounce Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act cases are filed.to prosecute a person who had presented the cheque which bounced for insufficiency of funds. Earlier, a case under Section 138 could be filed by holder of the cheque at four different places of his choice including his place of business or residence. But, now after this landmark judgement in the case of Supreme Court of India has ruled that from now onwards a case can be filed only at the place where the branch of the bank on which the bounced cheque was drawn is located. Dashrath Rupsingh Rathod Versus State of Maharashtra & Anr. Source :Judis.nic.in Dashrath Rupsingh Rathod Versus Stat...
Read more