<?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>2018 (10) TMI 480 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=368514</link>
    <description>A society membership dispute does not, by itself, bar criminal investigation where the allegations disclose possible cheating, forgery, or dishonest interpolation of records. The High Court held that civil and criminal proceedings can operate in different fields, and that Section 482 inherent jurisdiction cannot be used to resolve disputed facts or assess mens rea at the FIR stage. It further held that a recall application cannot be used as a disguised review, and omission to disclose all documents earlier, though deprecated, did not justify recalling the prior order directing consideration of the complaint. The FIR was not quashed, the recall request was rejected, and the investigation was left to continue in accordance with law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 30 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 10 Oct 2018 09:08:12 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=537691" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (10) TMI 480 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=368514</link>
      <description>A society membership dispute does not, by itself, bar criminal investigation where the allegations disclose possible cheating, forgery, or dishonest interpolation of records. The High Court held that civil and criminal proceedings can operate in different fields, and that Section 482 inherent jurisdiction cannot be used to resolve disputed facts or assess mens rea at the FIR stage. It further held that a recall application cannot be used as a disguised review, and omission to disclose all documents earlier, though deprecated, did not justify recalling the prior order directing consideration of the complaint. The FIR was not quashed, the recall request was rejected, and the investigation was left to continue in accordance with law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 30 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=368514</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>