https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393945 Parallel invocation of Article 226 was held inappropriate where custody of seized money had already been ordered by the Magistrate under Section 451 CrPC read with Section 132 of the Income-tax Act and a criminal revision against that order was pending. The court treated the existence of that pending revision, together with other available remedies including recourse under Section 482 CrPC, as a reason to avoid bypassing the normal appellate and revisional hierarchy. The writ petition was therefore not maintainable, and the requested release and consequential reliefs were declined. en-us Mon, 27 Jan 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 26 Mar 2020 09:42:40 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393945 Parallel invocation of Article 226 was held inappropriate where custody of seized money had already been ordered by the Magistrate under Section 451 CrPC read with Section 132 of the Income-tax Act and a criminal revision against that order was pending. The court treated the existence of that pending revision, together with other available remedies including recourse under Section 482 CrPC, as a reason to avoid bypassing the normal appellate and revisional hierarchy. The writ petition was therefore not maintainable, and the requested release and consequential reliefs were declined. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 27 Jan 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393945