Cross-border payments for marketing and support services: tribunal limits unsubstantiated reimbursed expenses and remits provision accounting for veri...
Page of 4826
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
6901 to 6920 of 96510 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The dominant issue was whether inherent jurisdiction under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita could be invoked to quash a conviction and sentence for cheque dishonour under Section 138 of the NI Act after the criminal revision had been finally decided. The Court held that final adjudication of a criminal revision exhausts the Court's power to reopen the conviction through inherent jurisdiction; earlier single-judge authority suggesting otherwise was not accepted as permitting such post-revisional interference, and a contrary view in a later case was treated as fact-specific and not laying down a binding principle. The petition was dismissed as not maintainable, reserving liberty to pursue permissible remedies. - HC
The dominant issue was whether inherent jurisdiction under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita could be invoked to quash a conviction and sentence for cheque dishonour under Section 138 of the NI Act after the criminal revision had been finally decided. The Court held that final adjudication of a criminal revision exhausts the Court's power to reopen the conviction through inherent jurisdiction; earlier single-judge authority suggesting otherwise was not accepted as permitting such post-revisional interference, and a contrary view in a later case was treated as fact-specific and not laying down a binding principle. The petition was dismissed as not maintainable, reserving liberty to pursue permissible remedies. - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.