<?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>2001 (4) TMI 937 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197815</link>
    <description>Section 391 CrPC gives an appellate court a wide but exceptional discretion to take additional evidence where necessary to secure justice, and it may be used to correct a mere irregularity in an incomplete Section 313 examination if no prejudice is caused to the accused. Applying that approach, the omission was treated as curable and did not vitiate the conviction. On the corruption charge, the Court held that demand, recovery of tainted currency, surrounding circumstances, and the role attributed to the co-accused established the offence, even without direct proof of momentary acceptance by the principal accused. The convictions and sentences were therefore affirmed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 26 Apr 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 26 Jul 2022 14:45:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=504726" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (4) TMI 937 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197815</link>
      <description>Section 391 CrPC gives an appellate court a wide but exceptional discretion to take additional evidence where necessary to secure justice, and it may be used to correct a mere irregularity in an incomplete Section 313 examination if no prejudice is caused to the accused. Applying that approach, the omission was treated as curable and did not vitiate the conviction. On the corruption charge, the Court held that demand, recovery of tainted currency, surrounding circumstances, and the role attributed to the co-accused established the offence, even without direct proof of momentary acceptance by the principal accused. The convictions and sentences were therefore affirmed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 26 Apr 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197815</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>