https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112172 A charge founded on a summons received after the time fixed for appearance was unsustainable on its own facts and had to be deleted. The remaining question was whether a composite charge covering multiple summonses vitiated the proceedings. Applying Section 464 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the court noted that an error, omission, irregularity, or misjoinder in a charge does not invalidate proceedings unless failure of justice is shown. As no prejudice or miscarriage of justice was established in relation to the remaining summonses, the composite charge was upheld in substance, subject to exclusion of the defective summons. en-us Mon, 21 May 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 26 Apr 2012 18:42:50 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112172 A charge founded on a summons received after the time fixed for appearance was unsustainable on its own facts and had to be deleted. The remaining question was whether a composite charge covering multiple summonses vitiated the proceedings. Applying Section 464 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the court noted that an error, omission, irregularity, or misjoinder in a charge does not invalidate proceedings unless failure of justice is shown. As no prejudice or miscarriage of justice was established in relation to the remaining summonses, the composite charge was upheld in substance, subject to exclusion of the defective summons. Case-Laws Companies Law Mon, 21 May 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112172