<?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>1992 (8) TMI 301 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=274586</link>
    <description>Public interest standing cannot be used by a third party to obstruct a bona fide criminal investigation or to litigate on behalf of suspected accused persons; the petition seeking to restrain issuance of a letter rogatory, challenge the criminal revision, and quash the FIR was therefore held not maintainable. The High Court&#039;s revisional and inherent powers are intended to prevent abuse of process and secure justice, but they cannot ordinarily be invoked at the investigation stage to terminate an ongoing police inquiry or pre-judge whether the FIR discloses an offence. The Court therefore set aside the suo motu intervention and left the investigation to proceed in accordance with law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 28 Aug 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 23 Aug 2018 12:27:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=531792" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1992 (8) TMI 301 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=274586</link>
      <description>Public interest standing cannot be used by a third party to obstruct a bona fide criminal investigation or to litigate on behalf of suspected accused persons; the petition seeking to restrain issuance of a letter rogatory, challenge the criminal revision, and quash the FIR was therefore held not maintainable. The High Court&#039;s revisional and inherent powers are intended to prevent abuse of process and secure justice, but they cannot ordinarily be invoked at the investigation stage to terminate an ongoing police inquiry or pre-judge whether the FIR discloses an offence. The Court therefore set aside the suo motu intervention and left the investigation to proceed in accordance with law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 28 Aug 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=274586</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>