I P C 1. A mere message or a telephonic message which does not clearly specify the offence, cannot be treated as an FIR. 2. Oral information given to an officer-in-charge of a police station can be treated as an FIR. March 24, 2021 sclaw This content is restricted to site members. If you are an existing user, please log in. New users may register below.Existing Users Log InUsername or EmailPassword Remember Me Forgot password? Click here to resetNew User? Click here to register Related Posts I P C IPC Section 302/34 – no contra evidence on behalf of the defence to explain as to why they all went together to the spot with fire-arms and shot at the deceased – On the other hand, the antecedent enmity between the accused and the victims as narrated in detail by PW-1 clearly brings out the fact that there existed a common intention on the part of the accused inasmuch as they went together armed with guns in broad day light to the land where the victims were engaged in irrigation – Also the manner in which the crime was executed clearly establishes a concerted action on part of the accused – Conviction under section 302 read with Section 34 of IPC uphold – Appeal dismissed. September 26, 2021September 27, 2021 sclaw I P C High Court ought not to have convicted the appellant for the offence under Section 304 PartI IPC – In absence of any intention on the part of the appellant, It is a clear case where the conviction of the appellant is to be modified to one under Section 304 PartII IPC by maintaining the conviction for the offence under Section 201 IPC. HELD converting conviction from the one under Section 304 PartI IPC to the one under Section 304 PartII IPC – Appeals are allowed in part and conviction of the appellant is modified from the one under Section 304 Part I /34 IPC to the one under Section 304 Part II /34 IPC September 26, 2021 sclaw
