Euthanasia, also known as assisted suicide or mercy killing, is a controversial practice that involves intentionally ending the life of a person suffering from an incurable or terminal illness. While some argue that euthanasia is a compassionate and humane way to relieve suffering, others believe that it is fundamentally wrong and should not be allowed. In this essay, I will present a persuasive argument against euthanasia, highlighting the ethical, moral, and practical concerns that make it an inappropriate and dangerous practice.
One major concern about euthanasia is that it violates the inherent value and dignity of human life. Every person, regardless of their circumstances or condition, has the right to live their life to the fullest and be treated with respect and compassion. Euthanasia, however, implies that the life of a person suffering from a terminal illness is not worth living and that it is acceptable to end their life in order to alleviate their suffering. This not only undermines the value of human life, but also sends a message that the lives of certain individuals are worth less than others.
Another issue with euthanasia is that it can easily be abused and misused. While proponents of euthanasia argue that it should only be available to those who are suffering from terminal illnesses and have made a voluntary and informed decision to end their life, there is a real risk that it could be used to exploit vulnerable people. For example, elderly or disabled individuals who may feel pressure to choose euthanasia in order to relieve their burden on their families or society could be coerced into making a decision that is not truly in their best interest. Similarly, family members or healthcare providers who stand to gain financially from the patient's death could use euthanasia as a way to hasten their demise.
Euthanasia also raises serious ethical and moral concerns. Many religious and philosophical traditions view the taking of a human life, even if it is done with the intention of relieving suffering, as fundamentally wrong. From a moral standpoint, euthanasia blurs the line between killing and allowing someone to die, and it raises questions about whether it is ever justifiable to intentionally end a person's life. Additionally, the practice of euthanasia could have a negative impact on society as a whole, eroding the respect for the sanctity of human life and leading to a culture that values convenience and efficiency over compassion and care.
Finally, there are practical concerns about the implementation and regulation of euthanasia. While some countries have legalized euthanasia under strict guidelines, there is still a risk that it could be carried out in an irresponsible or irresponsible manner, leading to abuses and abuses of power. There is also the possibility that once euthanasia is legalized, it could become a more common option for end-of-life care, leading to a decline in funding and resources for palliative care and other support services that help people to live with dignity and comfort in their final days.
In conclusion, while euthanasia may appear to be a compassionate solution to alleviate suffering, it is a dangerous and ethically problematic practice that should not be condoned. Rather than seeking to end the lives of those who are suffering, we should focus on providing them with the best possible care and support and ensuring that they are able to live their lives with dignity and respect.
Section 420 at Tiger Stadium
Months later I figured out that everything I knew or believed about her was all staged. The cheques was drawn on a bank account which was not operational. We thought some day we will convince them and so we moved on. Notwithstanding the foregoing, where the municipal corporation has been reimbursed by another municipal corporation for the tax credit to be paid to the owner pursuant to this subdivision, such credit shall be paid to such municipal corporation instead of such owner. Dishonest intention at the time of making the promise cannot be inferred by subsequent non-fulfilment of promise. When a person cheats and thereby dishonestly induces any person to deliver property to any other person, such person inducing the other is legally responsible under section 420 of the Indian Penal Code.
I filed an FIR against her for cheating immediately. From his mere failure to keep up promise consequently such a culpable intention cannot be presumed right at the beginning, that is when he made the promise. Answer if you want to go for quashing of FIR it is done from the High Court only and the minimum charges for quashing of FIR is 1 lakh 50000 which takes a minimum of 6 month time to be completed after that you can also file criminal complaint against the Builder for cheating and information as soon as the quashing of f i r is completed Read More In Criminal Law I am in a relationship for 5 years and we knew that our parents won't agree so we decided not to go against them. In the case of an election with respect to applicable life insurance benefits, the first sentence of this clause shall be applied as if subsection c 3 as in effect before the amendments made by such Act applied to such benefits. It can even result in trust issues and make it difficult for the person who has been cheated on to trust another person again. The court determined the established rule, through a catena of rulings, that, in order to determine the crime of cheating, it is necessary for the complainant to prove that the perpetrator had a fraudulent or dishonest intention at the time of creating a commitment or representation. After the confirmation these people are cheating him that too after 1 and half year now the client comes to me and says u r the introducer and same is been complained in the police station.
Sec. 420. Transfers Of Excess Pension Assets To Retiree Health Accounts
Thus, the act of accused amounts to cheating and was made punishable under section 417. When the doing of any act or not doing of any act causes wrongful gain of property to one person or a wrongful loss of property to a person, the said act is done dishonestly. A prudent man is a wise man but may not be a genius. A here induces Z to buy and pay for the false sample of the article. Hiralal Harilal Bhagwati v. One day we got to know that the builder has abandoned the project and has ran away with all the money of the buyers.
Section 73 to 75 deals with breach of contract whereas in IPC for Cheating section 420 deals with offence related to cheating. In order to bring a case for the offence in IPC for Cheating section 420, it is not merely satisfactory to prove that a false representation had been made, but it is further necessary to prove that the representation was false to the knowledge of the accused and was made in order to deceive the complainant. Upper Level Baseline seats are among the furthest away from the court, but are also among the least expensive seats in Toyota Center. This is known as "examination in chief. It went on for almost 1. The essential elements of this provision are:.
It says that a person is said to do a thing fraudulently if he does that thing with intent to defraud but not otherwise. Note : By above mentioned examples we can know the base of a case whether the case has the base of cheating or not which tends to us the section 420 case details or facts confirms the nature of the case. The act done in order to gain a property wrongfully or cause a loss to another person wrongfully is said to be done dishonestly. It can refer to a general intent to break the law or a specific prearranged plan to commit a particular offense. Such a proceeding shall be commenced within thirty days of the mailing of the notice of the board of assessment review to the new owner as provided in this paragraph. An eligible employer shall not be treated as failing to meet the requirements of this paragraph for any taxable year if, in lieu of any reduction of retiree health coverage permitted under the regulations prescribed under clause i , the employer reduces applicable employer cost by an amount not in excess of the reduction in costs which would have occurred if the employer had made the maximum permissible reduction in retiree health coverage under such regulations.
These provisions have been laid down under Section 265G, Section 375 and Section 376 of The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. In the case of a qualified future transfer or collectively bargained transfer to which subsection f applies, any assets so transferred may also be used to pay liabilities described in subsection f 2 C. A false pretence can be used where the party wants to come in a contract with the other party. The defense can produce both oral and documentary evidence. Dishonest inducement refers to an act where a person dishonestly leads someone to do something and doing of such an act causes damage or harm to the person who has been dishonestly induced. This is one thing to claim that the Court does not recognize the appeal of the complainant at this juncture, but it is another thing to suggest that it is, therefore, impermissible to glance through the accepted records in order to practice the intrinsic jurisdiction of this Court.
A exhibits the false sample of an article to Z and intentionally makes Z believe that the article corresponds with the sample. The portion of any reserves remaining as of the close of December 31, 1990, shall be allocated on a pro rata basis to qualified current retiree health liabilities. Such municipal corporation shall add such pro rata exemption credits for such property to any outstanding pro rata exemption amounts and proceed as provided in subparagraph iv of paragraph a of this subdivision. The behavior of the GCS explicitly showed that, at the time of filing an application for exemption, there was no false or dishonest purpose, either of the GCS or of the appellants in their capacity as office-bearers. And Seven People Were Involved In Giving The Case But Only Two Name Were In The Fir.
He said that he had repaid the loan and upon repayment also I have not returned the cheque to him. The court decided that the deception of the accused had induced the victim to do something which would not have been done if not deceived and induced so. Delivery of property refers to transfer of rights over the property to another person. Such imprisonment and fine will depend upon the seriousness of the crime. According to the IPC for Cheating, Section 420 states that whoever cheats and thereby dishonestly induces the person deceived to deliver any property to any person, or to make, alter or destroy the whole or any part of a valuable security, or anything which is signed or sealed, and which is capable of being converted into a valuable security, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine. Anil Kumar Agarwal, it had been held that the underpayment or non-payment of the price of the goods alone does not constitute the commission of an offence of fraud or cheating or a criminal breach of trust. It must be shown that there was no effort on the part of accused to perform his promise.
Citizens Bank Park, section 420, home of Philadelphia Phillies, page 1
In case the accused is acquitted, the prosecution is given time to appeal against the order of the court. Is it Cheating When no Damage caused to Victim In case when no damages are caused to the complainant by the act of cheating, still the accused according to Section 420 of the IPC will be liable for the offence of cheating as it does create an apprehension in the mind of an individual when he is cheated on by a person. Section 420 IPC Punishment Is section 420 IPC bailable or not? The application shall be made on a form prescribed by the commissioner. Upon forensic examination of the same my claim was proved and the manager was sentenced to imprisonment for a period of 4 years. If an employee is a key employee within the meaning of section 416 i 1 with respect to any plan year ending in a taxable year, such employee shall not be taken into account in computing qualified current retiree liabilities for such taxable year or in calculating applicable employer cost under subsection c 3 B. If the police refuse to record a FIR, the court has the authority to do so. In applying such regulations to any subsequent taxable year, any reduction in applicable employer cost under this clause shall be treated as if it were an equivalent reduction in retiree health coverage.