Governmental authority status supports construction-service exemption, while pre-cutoff contract and stamp-duty compliance requires verification on re...
Automated Free Sale and Commerce Certificates enable paperless processing while retaining risk-based manual verification for selected exporter applica...
Employee stock-shortage penalties do not constitute consideration for services, preventing GST collection under Schedule II in employment relationship...
The HC held that the Special Judge's cognizance of money laundering charges against a government servant, based on assets exceeding known income by 113.45%, was invalid for failure to comply with the first proviso to Section 223(1) of the BNSS, which mandates giving the accused an opportunity to be heard before cognizance. This procedural safeguard departs from the Cr.P.C. and cannot be bypassed. The Court clarified that re-examination of the complainant or witnesses is unnecessary when the complaint is by a public servant in official capacity or under transfer provisions of Section 212 BNSS. Consequently, the HC set aside the cognizance order dated 27.03.2025, reverting the matter to the pre-cognizance stage with directions for the Special Judge to adhere to the statutory hearing requirement before proceeding further. The petition was allowed accordingly.
The HC held that the Special Judge's cognizance of money laundering charges against a government servant, based on assets exceeding known income by 113.45%, was invalid for failure to comply with the first proviso to Section 223(1) of the BNSS, which mandates giving the accused an opportunity to be heard before cognizance. This procedural safeguard departs from the Cr.P.C. and cannot be bypassed. The Court clarified that re-examination of the complainant or witnesses is unnecessary when the complaint is by a public servant in official capacity or under transfer provisions of Section 212 BNSS. Consequently, the HC set aside the cognizance order dated 27.03.2025, reverting the matter to the pre-cognizance stage with directions for the Special Judge to adhere to the statutory hearing requirement before proceeding further. The petition was allowed accordingly.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
