<?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>2004 (7) TMI 679 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198548</link>
    <description>Section 10 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 permits prosecution of a company and of persons in charge of and responsible for its business, as well as officers whose consent, connivance or neglect is shown, when there is a contravention of an order under Section 3. The provision does not require that the company itself must be prosecuted before such persons can be proceeded against. At the framing of charge stage, the court only examines whether material exists to proceed, and interference under Section 482 CrPC is narrow and sparingly exercised. On that basis, quashing the charge was unjustified and the prosecution was allowed to continue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 28 Jul 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 02 Feb 2018 18:16:54 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=507388" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (7) TMI 679 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198548</link>
      <description>Section 10 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 permits prosecution of a company and of persons in charge of and responsible for its business, as well as officers whose consent, connivance or neglect is shown, when there is a contravention of an order under Section 3. The provision does not require that the company itself must be prosecuted before such persons can be proceeded against. At the framing of charge stage, the court only examines whether material exists to proceed, and interference under Section 482 CrPC is narrow and sparingly exercised. On that basis, quashing the charge was unjustified and the prosecution was allowed to continue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 28 Jul 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198548</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>