Karnataka HC Notices Sri Lankan Judge's Rights Plea
07 Mar 2026
Karnataka Proposes Social Media Ban for Under-16s
07 Mar 2026
Justice Dharmadhikari Sworn In as 55th Madras HC Chief Justice
07 Mar 2026
Punjab HC Acquits Ram Rahim in Journalist Murder
07 Mar 2026
Appellate Courts Can Rely on Unexhibited Public Documents Produced by Plaintiff: Gujarat High Court Dismisses Second Appeal Under Section 100 CPC
07 Mar 2026
Punjab & Haryana HC Denies Anticipatory Bail in Murder via Humiliation Case: Sections 103(1) & 3(5) BNS
07 Mar 2026
Security Deposit Forfeiture Without Show-Cause Notice Violates Natural Justice: Himachal Pradesh High Court
07 Mar 2026
S.202 CrPC Inquiry Not Mandatory for Public Servant Complaints If Accused Outside Jurisdiction: Supreme Court
09 Mar 2026
Professor MP Singh: Shaper of Constitutional Discourse
09 Mar 2026
Back
Next 
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
H.P. SANDESH, J
N. Padmini W/o Sri. N.C.S.Mayya – Appellant
Versus
Superintendent Of Police – Respondent
Headnote: Read headnote
JUDGMENT :
Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the respondent.
2. This appeal is filed by appellant-accused No.1 under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure challenging the judgment of conviction and sentence passed against her to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year for the offence under Section 120B IPC, simple imprisonment for a period of one year with fine of Rs.5,000/- for the offence under Section 420 IPC and simple imprisonment for a period of two years with fine of Rs.10,000/- for the offence under Section 13 (2) read with Section 13 (1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act.
3. The factual matrix of the case of the prosecution before the Tria
Exceeding authority in banking operations without financial loss to the bank does not establish intent to defraud or misconduct under the IPC or Prevention of Corruption Act.
The judgment established the importance of considering the entirety of evidence and the burden of proof in cases of criminal conspiracy and fraudulent activities.
To sustain a conviction for criminal conspiracy, there must be sufficient evidence demonstrating a meeting of minds and the intent to commit fraud, as mere presumption is insufficient.
The judgment emphasizes the need for independent evidence for each offense, the distinct and independent nature of certain offenses, and the application of section 26 of the General Clauses Act in de....
A person cannot be convicted for an offense under a section of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) if no charge under that section was framed against him, and the offense is not a lesser charge to the offens....
Intention to cheat must exist from the outset for a conviction under IPC Section 420; absence of deceitful intent and no pecuniary advantage mandated an acquittal.
The court reaffirmed that misappropriation of loan funds constitutes a criminal offense regardless of subsequent recovery through civil actions.
The conduct of the appellants constituted a criminal conspiracy and cheating, supported by substantial evidence of fraudulent loan disbursement and failure to comply with banking regulations.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
Listen Article