https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=260978 An application under Section 482 CrPC was held not maintainable where the petitioner had already challenged the Magistrate's order in revision on the same grounds, because the inherent jurisdiction could not be used as a second revision in disguise. The Court also treated the Supreme Court's prior refusal to transfer the complaint as an additional bar to reopening the same grievance, and found no basis for interference. The petition therefore failed on maintainability and merits, and the complaint proceedings were permitted to continue before the trial court. en-us Wed, 18 Mar 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 23 Jul 2015 10:52:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=260978 An application under Section 482 CrPC was held not maintainable where the petitioner had already challenged the Magistrate's order in revision on the same grounds, because the inherent jurisdiction could not be used as a second revision in disguise. The Court also treated the Supreme Court's prior refusal to transfer the complaint as an additional bar to reopening the same grievance, and found no basis for interference. The petition therefore failed on maintainability and merits, and the complaint proceedings were permitted to continue before the trial court. Case-Laws Companies Law Wed, 18 Mar 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=260978