<?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>1960 (9) TMI 117 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279269</link>
    <description>Where a criminal matter is already before the Supreme Court, the Court&#039;s power to control the proceeding, including surrender, bail and suspension of sentence, prevails in that overlapping field. The Governor&#039;s clemency power under Article 161 is wide, but it cannot be used to suspend sentence for the same period when the case is sub judice before the Court; Order XXI, Rule 5 operates as the procedural basis for insisting on surrender unless the Court grants exemption. On that reasoning, the petitioner was not entitled to avoid surrender on the strength of a gubernatorial suspension order. A dissent took the view that Articles 161 and 142 operate in distinct fields and that the Governor&#039;s power remained available.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 05 Sep 1960 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 12 May 2026 12:56:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=562319" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1960 (9) TMI 117 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279269</link>
      <description>Where a criminal matter is already before the Supreme Court, the Court&#039;s power to control the proceeding, including surrender, bail and suspension of sentence, prevails in that overlapping field. The Governor&#039;s clemency power under Article 161 is wide, but it cannot be used to suspend sentence for the same period when the case is sub judice before the Court; Order XXI, Rule 5 operates as the procedural basis for insisting on surrender unless the Court grants exemption. On that reasoning, the petitioner was not entitled to avoid surrender on the strength of a gubernatorial suspension order. A dissent took the view that Articles 161 and 142 operate in distinct fields and that the Governor&#039;s power remained available.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 05 Sep 1960 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279269</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>