DHARMADEO RAI versus RAMNAGINA RAI

DHARMADEO RAI versus RAMNAGINA RAI

Section 83(1) of the Indian Registration Act is permissive and does not bar private prosecution for offences under the Act, whether or not the offence comes to the knowledge of a registering officer in his official capacity.

Parties
Appellant: Dharmadeo Rai; Respondent: Ramnagina Rai; Intervener: State of Bihar
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
18 January 1972
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal by Special Leave From Patna High Court Judgment and Order Dated November 12, 1968, in Criminal Appeal No. 58 of 1966
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Abetment, Forgery, Registration of Documents, Private Complaint
Criminal Law Abetment Forgery Registration of Documents Private Complaint

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dharmadeo Rai

Appellant

Ramnagina Rai

Respondent

State of Bihar

Intervener

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal by Special Leave From Patna High Court Judgment and Order Dated November 12, 1968, in Criminal Appeal No. 58 of 1966

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Section 83(1) of the Indian Registration Act prohibits prosecution by a private person without permission of designated officers
  2. 2 Whether the appellant's conviction was unsustainable due to lack of permission under Section 83

Ratio Decidendi

Section 83(1) of the Indian Registration Act is permissive and does not bar private prosecution for offences under the Act, whether or not the offence comes to the knowledge of a registering officer in his official capacity.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Conviction under section 82(d) of the Indian Registration Act and the sentence of six months' rigorous imprisonment for the appellant affirmed