Specialized Investment Fund distribution now requires dedicated certification, while transitional recognition preserves existing qualified distributor...
Overlapping GST proceedings require Central and State authorities to designate one competent authority for coordinated adjudication of the same matter...
Composite healthcare supplies retain exemption when patient care is the contract's essential character, despite payment through an implementing agency...
Receipt of immovable property requires actual possession or enjoyment; redevelopment allotments exchanged for tenancy rights fall outside deemed incom...
Petition for discharge u/s 245(2) Cr.P.C. dismissed in offences u/s 135(1)(a) and 135(1)(b) of Customs Act, 1962 relating to improperly imported gold bars. At charge framing stage, court to prima facie consider sufficient grounds for proceeding against accused, not appreciate evidence for conviction. While considering discharge, court not to deeply evaluate probative value but form presumptive opinion on factual ingredients constituting alleged offence without roving inquiry or weighing evidence as in trial. Gold seized from pillion rider's possession, petitioner's involvement matter for trial. Sanction order challenged on ground of not considering evidence nature, role and mens rea, but petitioner neither specified facts not considered nor showed apparent error. No evidence produced to enable Magistrate find charge groundless. Dismissal of discharge petition cannot be faulted, revision devoid of merits, liable to be dismissed.
Petition for discharge u/s 245(2) Cr.P.C. dismissed in offences u/s 135(1)(a) and 135(1)(b) of Customs Act, 1962 relating to improperly imported gold bars. At charge framing stage, court to prima facie consider sufficient grounds for proceeding against accused, not appreciate evidence for conviction. While considering discharge, court not to deeply evaluate probative value but form presumptive opinion on factual ingredients constituting alleged offence without roving inquiry or weighing evidence as in trial. Gold seized from pillion rider's possession, petitioner's involvement matter for trial. Sanction order challenged on ground of not considering evidence nature, role and mens rea, but petitioner neither specified facts not considered nor showed apparent error. No evidence produced to enable Magistrate find charge groundless. Dismissal of discharge petition cannot be faulted, revision devoid of merits, liable to be dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.