<?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>2007 (1) TMI 629 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280570</link>
    <description>Criminal process cannot be initiated on mere suspicion; at the stage of cognizance, the court need not require proof beyond reasonable doubt, but there must be some material connecting the accused with the alleged offence. Where the complaint had already been investigated, the final report was accepted, and no substantive evidence linked the accused to the offence, the order taking cognizance and issuing summons was unsustainable and was quashed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 31 Jan 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 May 2019 17:32:52 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=570706" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (1) TMI 629 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280570</link>
      <description>Criminal process cannot be initiated on mere suspicion; at the stage of cognizance, the court need not require proof beyond reasonable doubt, but there must be some material connecting the accused with the alleged offence. Where the complaint had already been investigated, the final report was accepted, and no substantive evidence linked the accused to the offence, the order taking cognizance and issuing summons was unsustainable and was quashed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 31 Jan 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280570</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>