https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101468 Where accused persons have already been exempted from personal appearance under section 205 CrPC, a Magistrate should not refuse exemption from examination under section 313 CrPC without reasons or indication of incriminating material requiring such examination. The Calcutta High Court noted that the petitioners were prosecuted under the Companies Act, their attendance had been dispensed with during trial, and the exemption request after prosecution evidence was rejected summarily despite no objection from the opposite party. In those circumstances, the refusal was treated as an improper exercise of jurisdiction and was set aside, with the matter directed to proceed before the Magistrate after allowing the exemption application. en-us Wed, 14 Jan 1987 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 09 Feb 2012 18:05:32 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101468 Where accused persons have already been exempted from personal appearance under section 205 CrPC, a Magistrate should not refuse exemption from examination under section 313 CrPC without reasons or indication of incriminating material requiring such examination. The Calcutta High Court noted that the petitioners were prosecuted under the Companies Act, their attendance had been dispensed with during trial, and the exemption request after prosecution evidence was rejected summarily despite no objection from the opposite party. In those circumstances, the refusal was treated as an improper exercise of jurisdiction and was set aside, with the matter directed to proceed before the Magistrate after allowing the exemption application. Case-Laws Companies Law Wed, 14 Jan 1987 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101468