<?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>2011 (11) TMI 828 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279648</link>
    <description>A Special Judge under the Prevention of Corruption Act can tender pardon to an accomplice before the charge-sheet is filed, because the power conferred by Section 5(2) is substantive and is not confined to the post-committal stage. The deeming clause attached to that provision operates only for the limited purpose of Section 308 CrPC and cannot be expanded to curtail the express statutory power. Reading Sections 306, 307 and 308 CrPC harmoniously with Sections 5(2), 5(3) and 26 of the Act, the Court treated the Special Judge as a court of original criminal jurisdiction. The challenge to the pardon order failed, and the order was sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 22 Nov 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 29 Mar 2019 14:15:22 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=564669" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (11) TMI 828 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279648</link>
      <description>A Special Judge under the Prevention of Corruption Act can tender pardon to an accomplice before the charge-sheet is filed, because the power conferred by Section 5(2) is substantive and is not confined to the post-committal stage. The deeming clause attached to that provision operates only for the limited purpose of Section 308 CrPC and cannot be expanded to curtail the express statutory power. Reading Sections 306, 307 and 308 CrPC harmoniously with Sections 5(2), 5(3) and 26 of the Act, the Court treated the Special Judge as a court of original criminal jurisdiction. The challenge to the pardon order failed, and the order was sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 22 Nov 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279648</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>