AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
We are of opinion that cases u/s 565 (4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure should be dealt with under the first part of Section 176 of the
Indian Penal Code. We are fortified in this opinion by the ruling in Panatulla v. Queen-Empress 15 C. 386 in which it was held that the aggravated
penalty constituted by the second Clause of Section 177 of Indian Penal Code can only be inflicted when the information required to be given
relates to the commission of some particular offence and not of offences generally. The words for the purpose of preventing the commission of an
offence"" in Section 176 of the Indian Penal Code should, we think, be construed in the same way. The information required to be given u/s 565 (4)
of the Criminal Procedure Code cannot be said to be required for the purpose of preventing the commission of any particular offence though it may
be required for the purpose of preventing the commission of offences generally.