<?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>1953 (11) TMI 20 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198050</link>
    <description>High Court contempt jurisdiction is a special inherent power of a court of record and is preserved by Article 215, so it does not fall within the ordinary operation of the Criminal Procedure Code. Provisions for transfer under the Code do not convert contempt proceedings into ordinary criminal cases, and later contempt legislation assumes the High Court&#039;s existing jurisdiction. On that basis, the Supreme Court lacked power in an original petition to transfer the contempt matter to another High Court or direct that a named judge of the same High Court not hear it. It was noted only as a matter of propriety that a judge personally attacked should ordinarily avoid hearing the matter if possible.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 25 Nov 1953 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 22 Jan 2018 11:41:53 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=505562" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1953 (11) TMI 20 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198050</link>
      <description>High Court contempt jurisdiction is a special inherent power of a court of record and is preserved by Article 215, so it does not fall within the ordinary operation of the Criminal Procedure Code. Provisions for transfer under the Code do not convert contempt proceedings into ordinary criminal cases, and later contempt legislation assumes the High Court&#039;s existing jurisdiction. On that basis, the Supreme Court lacked power in an original petition to transfer the contempt matter to another High Court or direct that a named judge of the same High Court not hear it. It was noted only as a matter of propriety that a judge personally attacked should ordinarily avoid hearing the matter if possible.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 25 Nov 1953 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198050</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>