<?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>1996 (4) TMI 520 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=281637</link>
    <description>In a summons case, discharge is not available under Section 251 read with Section 255(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure before evidence under Section 254 is recorded, because Section 251 only requires the particulars of the offence to be stated and Section 255(1) permits acquittal only after evidence is taken. The Court also held that, at the preliminary stage, the Magistrate cannot undertake a detailed appreciation of evidence or treat the dispute as civil in nature to terminate the prosecution. The discharge petition and the order based on such premature evaluation were therefore held unsustainable, and the matter was remitted for trial and disposal in accordance with law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 26 Apr 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 28 Jun 2019 16:46:30 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=576930" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1996 (4) TMI 520 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=281637</link>
      <description>In a summons case, discharge is not available under Section 251 read with Section 255(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure before evidence under Section 254 is recorded, because Section 251 only requires the particulars of the offence to be stated and Section 255(1) permits acquittal only after evidence is taken. The Court also held that, at the preliminary stage, the Magistrate cannot undertake a detailed appreciation of evidence or treat the dispute as civil in nature to terminate the prosecution. The discharge petition and the order based on such premature evaluation were therefore held unsustainable, and the matter was remitted for trial and disposal in accordance with law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 26 Apr 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=281637</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>