<?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>2012 (12) TMI 965 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169767</link>
    <description>When the accused resides outside the Magistrate&#039;s territorial jurisdiction, amended Section 202 of the Code of Criminal Procedure requires the Magistrate to postpone issuance of process and either inquire into the complaint or direct investigation before deciding whether there is sufficient ground to proceed. The inquiry under Section 202 is limited to testing the truth of the complaint allegations and is distinct from investigation under Section 156. Because that mandatory pre-summoning step was omitted after the amendment had come into force, the process order was invalid. The complaint itself was not quashed; the matter was remitted to the Magistrate for fresh consideration in compliance with Section 202.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 03 Dec 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 02 May 2015 17:05:45 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=383702" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (12) TMI 965 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169767</link>
      <description>When the accused resides outside the Magistrate&#039;s territorial jurisdiction, amended Section 202 of the Code of Criminal Procedure requires the Magistrate to postpone issuance of process and either inquire into the complaint or direct investigation before deciding whether there is sufficient ground to proceed. The inquiry under Section 202 is limited to testing the truth of the complaint allegations and is distinct from investigation under Section 156. Because that mandatory pre-summoning step was omitted after the amendment had come into force, the process order was invalid. The complaint itself was not quashed; the matter was remitted to the Magistrate for fresh consideration in compliance with Section 202.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 03 Dec 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169767</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>