TaxTMI Login
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Just a moment...
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the conviction and appellate affirmation were liable to be set aside and the matter remanded because the accused was not afforded a proper opportunity after appearance, including compliance with the procedure for recording the statement under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Analysis: The revision challenged the concurrent findings on the ground that the trial process was irregular after the accused appeared, as the case proceeded on the earlier sworn statement and the accused's statement was recorded in a manner found procedurally unsound. The record showed that the trial court and the lower appellate court had not properly addressed this irregularity. Since the accused was entitled to a fair opportunity in the trial process, the defect went to the fairness of the proceedings.
Conclusion: The impugned orders were set aside and the matter was remanded to the trial court for fresh consideration in accordance with law.
Final Conclusion: The revision succeeded on the ground of procedural irregularity, and the proceedings were restored to the trial court for a fresh decision after giving both sides an opportunity.
Ratio Decidendi: Where the trial procedure is vitiated by a material irregularity affecting the accused's opportunity to participate in the proceedings, the conviction and appellate affirmation cannot stand and remand for fresh disposal is justified.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
