Site navigation

In Mobarik Ali Ahmed v. State of Bombay (1957), a person in Karachi made dishonest representations…

The Supreme Court held that the false representations took effect when received in Bombay and the payment was induced there, so the offence of cheating was committed within…

Choose your answer

In Mobarik Ali Ahmed v. State of Bombay (1957), a person in Karachi made dishonest representations received in Bombay and thereby induced payment there, without entering India during the offence. What did the Supreme Court hold about Indian criminal jurisdiction?

Select one answer
Answer and explanation

Correct answer A

The Supreme Court held that the false representations took effect when received in Bombay and the payment was induced there, so the offence of cheating was committed within India under IPC s.2 and the Bombay court had jurisdiction although the accused was physically in Karachi. His absence and his nationality did not matter. BNS s.1(3) now states the corresponding territorial rule.

Practice for these exams

Related exam syllabi

Related questions in this topic