TaxTMI Login
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Just a moment...
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕ Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
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, at the stage of framing charge, the Court could consider material collected during investigation but not included in the charge-sheet, and whether the charge under Section 406 IPC against the petitioner was sustainable on the material before the Court.
Analysis: Fair and just investigation was treated as an integral part of criminal process, and the Court held that the prosecution cannot withhold material collected by the investigating officer from judicial consideration at the stage of charge. The statements recorded under Section 161 CrPC and the earlier complaints showed that the complainant had separated from her in-laws in October 2000, had shifted to rented accommodation with her belongings, and thereafter made no complaint against the petitioner regarding any retained istridhan. The allegations were directed substantially against the husband, while the petitioner and other family members had even supported action against him. On that material, the Court found that the earlier entrustment, if any, had ceased to have relevance and the charge against the petitioner was based on an incomplete and one-sided view of the record.
Conclusion: The Court held that the withheld investigation material had to be considered, and the charge under Section 406 IPC against the petitioner was not sustainable.
Ratio Decidendi: At the stage of framing charge, the Court must consider the entire investigation record collected by the investigating officer, including material not placed in the charge-sheet if its suppression is brought to notice, and a charge cannot be sustained where the available material does not disclose a prima facie case.
TaxTMI 
