<?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>1980 (10) TMI 203 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193587</link>
    <description>A Magistrate who orders investigation under Section 156(3) of the Code is not bound by a police report stating that no case is made out. The statutory scheme allows the Magistrate either to take cognizance on the complaint under Section 190(1)(a) and proceed under Sections 200 to 204, or to act on the police report under Section 173; the police opinion does not control the judicial function. Even after an adverse report, the Magistrate may treat the complaint as subsisting, record the complainant&#039;s statements, and decide whether process should issue. The prior direction for investigation does not bar cognizance on the original complaint.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 10 Oct 1980 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 08 Aug 2017 15:36:01 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=484886" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1980 (10) TMI 203 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193587</link>
      <description>A Magistrate who orders investigation under Section 156(3) of the Code is not bound by a police report stating that no case is made out. The statutory scheme allows the Magistrate either to take cognizance on the complaint under Section 190(1)(a) and proceed under Sections 200 to 204, or to act on the police report under Section 173; the police opinion does not control the judicial function. Even after an adverse report, the Magistrate may treat the complaint as subsisting, record the complainant&#039;s statements, and decide whether process should issue. The prior direction for investigation does not bar cognizance on the original complaint.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 10 Oct 1980 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193587</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>