Composite show-cause notices spanning multiple financial years are jurisdictionally invalid, allowing writ review despite an alternative appellate rem...
Fair-hearing requirements require supply of documents relied on in pleadings where the retention order is founded on them; service of a panchnama alone does not provide an adequate opportunity to respond. Retention of seized documents is justified only when they are relied on in a prosecution complaint or supplementary complaint and required to prove the case against an accused. Documents not so required must be released within a reasonable time, while authenticated photocopies may be retained. The retention direction was consequently limited to documents necessary as prosecution evidence.
Fair-hearing requirements require supply of documents relied on in pleadings where the retention order is founded on them; service of a panchnama alone does not provide an adequate opportunity to respond. Retention of seized documents is justified only when they are relied on in a prosecution complaint or supplementary complaint and required to prove the case against an accused. Documents not so required must be released within a reasonable time, while authenticated photocopies may be retained. The retention direction was consequently limited to documents necessary as prosecution evidence.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.