<?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 (11) TMI 678 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196662</link>
    <description>The statutory opinion on whether sufficient material exists to proceed against an accused lies with the investigating officer, reflected in the SP&#039;s report in the CBI set-up, and superior officers may supervise but not substitute that function. A lone dissent based on legal interpretation did not create a genuine internal difference warranting reference to the Attorney General, because the investigation team and law officers were otherwise aligned in favour of prosecution. The collected investigation material is not itself legal evidence; the court alone decides whether to accept the police report. The CVC&#039;s advice was treated as advisory only, and the full material with the SP&#039;s report had to be placed before the Special Judge.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 27 Nov 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 12 Feb 2024 17:02:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=499335" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (11) TMI 678 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196662</link>
      <description>The statutory opinion on whether sufficient material exists to proceed against an accused lies with the investigating officer, reflected in the SP&#039;s report in the CBI set-up, and superior officers may supervise but not substitute that function. A lone dissent based on legal interpretation did not create a genuine internal difference warranting reference to the Attorney General, because the investigation team and law officers were otherwise aligned in favour of prosecution. The collected investigation material is not itself legal evidence; the court alone decides whether to accept the police report. The CVC&#039;s advice was treated as advisory only, and the full material with the SP&#039;s report had to be placed before the Special Judge.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 27 Nov 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196662</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>