<?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>1963 (5) TMI 59 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169959</link>
    <description>Section 53 of the Madras District Police Act, 1859 protects only acts done under a statutory police power and requires a real and reasonable nexus to that power; conduct such as beating, confining or removing an injured person during investigation is not protected merely because it occurred in the course of official duties, so the limitation bar did not apply. A Standing Order governing completion of investigation was treated as administrative and directory, and non-compliance did not vitiate the proceedings absent prejudice. On the evidence, the accused were found guilty of voluntarily causing hurt for the purpose of obtaining information, attracting section 330 of the IPC, but the graver charge under section 331 was not made out.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 09 May 1963 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 13 May 2015 12:22:48 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=384767" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1963 (5) TMI 59 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169959</link>
      <description>Section 53 of the Madras District Police Act, 1859 protects only acts done under a statutory police power and requires a real and reasonable nexus to that power; conduct such as beating, confining or removing an injured person during investigation is not protected merely because it occurred in the course of official duties, so the limitation bar did not apply. A Standing Order governing completion of investigation was treated as administrative and directory, and non-compliance did not vitiate the proceedings absent prejudice. On the evidence, the accused were found guilty of voluntarily causing hurt for the purpose of obtaining information, attracting section 330 of the IPC, but the graver charge under section 331 was not made out.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 09 May 1963 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169959</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>