<?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>2013 (7) TMI 1128 - Punjab and Haryana High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279511</link>
    <description>Carrying a mobile phone and charger into jail may attract the Prisons Act prohibition where the articles appear intended to facilitate communication with a prisoner. Section 42 covers not only introducing or removing prohibited articles, but also communication or attempted communication with prisoners contrary to applicable rules. Inherent powers to quash criminal proceedings under the Code of Criminal Procedure were not warranted where the alleged articles were concealed while entering jail premises, charges had already been framed, and no exceptional basis for intervention was established. The FIR and subsequent proceedings therefore continued.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 19 Jul 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 22 Mar 2019 10:07:48 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=563744" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (7) TMI 1128 - Punjab and Haryana High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279511</link>
      <description>Carrying a mobile phone and charger into jail may attract the Prisons Act prohibition where the articles appear intended to facilitate communication with a prisoner. Section 42 covers not only introducing or removing prohibited articles, but also communication or attempted communication with prisoners contrary to applicable rules. Inherent powers to quash criminal proceedings under the Code of Criminal Procedure were not warranted where the alleged articles were concealed while entering jail premises, charges had already been framed, and no exceptional basis for intervention was established. The FIR and subsequent proceedings therefore continued.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Jul 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279511</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>