<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1951 (6) TMI 8 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169679</link>
    <description>A police report treated as a completed challan was sufficient for cognizance under sections 173 and 190, and the later filing of a further challan did not invalidate it. The committal proceedings were upheld because section 340 gives an opportunity to engage counsel, not a right to state-appointed counsel, and the committal examination was adequate for its limited purpose. By contrast, the Sessions trial was vitiated because the accused was not fairly questioned on each material circumstance under section 342. Prior statements of two witnesses could not be used under section 288 without proper confrontation under section 145, leaving the conviction unsustainable and supporting a de novo retrial.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 01 Jun 1951 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 30 Apr 2015 11:24:19 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=383435" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1951 (6) TMI 8 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169679</link>
      <description>A police report treated as a completed challan was sufficient for cognizance under sections 173 and 190, and the later filing of a further challan did not invalidate it. The committal proceedings were upheld because section 340 gives an opportunity to engage counsel, not a right to state-appointed counsel, and the committal examination was adequate for its limited purpose. By contrast, the Sessions trial was vitiated because the accused was not fairly questioned on each material circumstance under section 342. Prior statements of two witnesses could not be used under section 288 without proper confrontation under section 145, leaving the conviction unsustainable and supporting a de novo retrial.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 01 Jun 1951 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169679</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>