Patent-settlement expenditure treated as commercially expedient revenue outlay, with foreign-law restrictions inapplicable before the prospective amen...
Page of 4796
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
361 to 380 of 95918 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Section 482 CrPC is described as a safeguard against misuse of criminal process, but not as a licence for threshold appreciation of evidence. In a dispute arising from import, customs clearance and later fiscal proceedings, the absence of original transit declarations, forensic or handwriting material, and proof that either petitioner authored the disputed signatures meant forgery under Sections 463, 464 and 468 IPC was not disclosed. The complaint also failed to show deception at the inception of the transaction, cheating by personation or conspiracy. The criminal case was treated as an abuse of process and the FIR, charge-sheet and cognizance order were quashed.
Section 482 CrPC is described as a safeguard against misuse of criminal process, but not as a licence for threshold appreciation of evidence. In a dispute arising from import, customs clearance and later fiscal proceedings, the absence of original transit declarations, forensic or handwriting material, and proof that either petitioner authored the disputed signatures meant forgery under Sections 463, 464 and 468 IPC was not disclosed. The complaint also failed to show deception at the inception of the transaction, cheating by personation or conspiracy. The criminal case was treated as an abuse of process and the FIR, charge-sheet and cognizance order were quashed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.