<?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>1970 (3) TMI 171 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=282633</link>
    <description>A criminal appeal raising arguable and substantial questions of fact or law should not be dismissed in limine by a bare one-word order. While a High Court may summarily reject an appeal, reasons should be recorded where the memorandum discloses substantial grounds requiring consideration on merits. The right of appeal under the Criminal Procedure Code extends to questions of fact and law, except in the limited class of jury trials. On the facts, the appeal raised significant issues, including the effect of the co-accused&#039;s acquittal and the evidentiary basis for the finding of intimacy, so the summary dismissal was unsustainable and the matter required fresh hearing.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 06 Mar 1970 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 16 Aug 2019 11:50:52 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=583789" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1970 (3) TMI 171 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=282633</link>
      <description>A criminal appeal raising arguable and substantial questions of fact or law should not be dismissed in limine by a bare one-word order. While a High Court may summarily reject an appeal, reasons should be recorded where the memorandum discloses substantial grounds requiring consideration on merits. The right of appeal under the Criminal Procedure Code extends to questions of fact and law, except in the limited class of jury trials. On the facts, the appeal raised significant issues, including the effect of the co-accused&#039;s acquittal and the evidentiary basis for the finding of intimacy, so the summary dismissal was unsustainable and the matter required fresh hearing.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 06 Mar 1970 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=282633</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>