https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275648 Executive instructions requiring complaints against a particular family in money-lending matters to be screened by a special committee, and the Collector's consequential communication, were contrary to the statutory scheme for recording and investigating cognizable offences. The Court held that no executive authority may defer police action or create a privileged procedure for selected persons without statutory foundation, as such interference defeats the object of the money-lending law and violates constitutional equality and the rule of law. The impugned directions were therefore illegal, unconstitutional, and liable to be quashed. en-us Tue, 14 Dec 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 11 Oct 2018 11:07:35 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275648 Executive instructions requiring complaints against a particular family in money-lending matters to be screened by a special committee, and the Collector's consequential communication, were contrary to the statutory scheme for recording and investigating cognizable offences. The Court held that no executive authority may defer police action or create a privileged procedure for selected persons without statutory foundation, as such interference defeats the object of the money-lending law and violates constitutional equality and the rule of law. The impugned directions were therefore illegal, unconstitutional, and liable to be quashed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 14 Dec 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275648