Article 141: Tampering with an official seal

Décisions de la Cour suprême interprétant cette section

1. Arrêt de la Cour suprême n° 17/2506 (1963)

   A person surveying disputed land under a civil court order, who is not an official acting to preserve seized, attached, or safekept property, is not within the protection of Section 141.

   Defendants were charged under Section 141 for removing boundary posts placed by a land official in making a disputed-area map under a civil court order. The Supreme Court held that such an official, acting to survey disputed land under a court order, was not an official whose mark was placed to evidence seizure, attachment, or safekeeping under Section 141.

2. Arrêt de la Cour suprême n° 544/2505 (1962)

   A charge that merely alleges destroying a seal stamped on a tree, without alleging it was affixed to evidence seizure, attachment, or safekeeping, does not make out the Section 141 offence and must be dismissed.

   The charge alleged that the defendant destroyed a forest-reserve boundary seal stamped on a tree. The Supreme Court held that because the charge did not allege the seal was affixed in the performance of duty to evidence seizure, attachment, or safekeeping, it failed to state a Section 141 offence and had to be dismissed.

Curated decisions with case numbers verified against the Supreme Court database. English renderings are the firm's editorial translation for study.