https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166978 A second petition under Section 482 CrPC was treated as maintainable because the earlier order had only quashed the summoning order and the later challenge was to a fresh, independent order, so Section 362 did not bar it. Previous sanction under Section 197 CrPC was required where the alleged acts had a reasonable nexus with official duty; once sanction was declined, cognizance could not validly be taken. As to petitioners not named in the FIR, the record disclosed no prima facie material connecting them to any conspiracy or other offence, and unsupported allegations could not justify continuation of the case. The proceedings were therefore liable to be quashed as an abuse of process. en-us Tue, 04 Jul 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 22 Nov 2014 11:59:11 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166978 A second petition under Section 482 CrPC was treated as maintainable because the earlier order had only quashed the summoning order and the later challenge was to a fresh, independent order, so Section 362 did not bar it. Previous sanction under Section 197 CrPC was required where the alleged acts had a reasonable nexus with official duty; once sanction was declined, cognizance could not validly be taken. As to petitioners not named in the FIR, the record disclosed no prima facie material connecting them to any conspiracy or other offence, and unsupported allegations could not justify continuation of the case. The proceedings were therefore liable to be quashed as an abuse of process. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 04 Jul 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166978