https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=386887 Section 362 of the Code of Criminal Procedure did not bar consideration of a request for continuation of interim protection, because such a request was not an attempt to alter the final order. Where petitions invoked both Section 482 CrPC and Articles 226 and 227 in proceedings seeking quashing of PMLA-related proceedings and summons, the Single Judge's order was treated as one passed in mixed criminal and writ jurisdiction. In that situation, the jurisdictions could not be separated for the purpose of intra-court appeal, so no appeal lay under Section 4 of the Karnataka High Court Act, 1961 and the appeals were not maintainable. en-us Tue, 17 Sep 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 11 Oct 2019 11:36:19 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=386887 Section 362 of the Code of Criminal Procedure did not bar consideration of a request for continuation of interim protection, because such a request was not an attempt to alter the final order. Where petitions invoked both Section 482 CrPC and Articles 226 and 227 in proceedings seeking quashing of PMLA-related proceedings and summons, the Single Judge's order was treated as one passed in mixed criminal and writ jurisdiction. In that situation, the jurisdictions could not be separated for the purpose of intra-court appeal, so no appeal lay under Section 4 of the Karnataka High Court Act, 1961 and the appeals were not maintainable. Case-Laws Money Laundering Tue, 17 Sep 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=386887