<?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>2006 (4) TMI 534 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=188109</link>
    <description>The Magistrate may take cognizance even if a police report does not implicate a person, but where the record shows that names were included in the summoning order by mistake and the investigation found no material against those persons, continuation of proceedings becomes unjust. Section 362 prevents review except for clerical or arithmetical correction, yet Section 482 preserves the High Court&#039;s inherent power to prevent abuse of process and secure the ends of justice. Applying that principle, the High Court ought to have intervened, and the order refusing relief was unsustainable; the appellants&#039; names were liable to be struck off from the array of accused.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 12 Apr 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 12 Mar 2024 12:59:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=448348" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (4) TMI 534 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=188109</link>
      <description>The Magistrate may take cognizance even if a police report does not implicate a person, but where the record shows that names were included in the summoning order by mistake and the investigation found no material against those persons, continuation of proceedings becomes unjust. Section 362 prevents review except for clerical or arithmetical correction, yet Section 482 preserves the High Court&#039;s inherent power to prevent abuse of process and secure the ends of justice. Applying that principle, the High Court ought to have intervened, and the order refusing relief was unsustainable; the appellants&#039; names were liable to be struck off from the array of accused.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 12 Apr 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=188109</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>