<?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>2012 (3) TMI 649 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287751</link>
    <description>Inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC must be used sparingly and only in exceptional cases where the allegations, taken at face value, disclose no offence or where intervention is needed to prevent abuse of process. A court should not ordinarily halt a police investigation at a premature stage, and prior departmental inquiries do not bar criminal investigation because they are distinct in object and consequence. The existence of an arbitration clause also does not exclude criminal law where the allegations disclose criminality. The quashing of the preliminary investigation was therefore unjustified, and the investigation was restored to proceed in accordance with law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 19 Mar 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 30 Apr 2020 14:14:01 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=611747" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (3) TMI 649 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287751</link>
      <description>Inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC must be used sparingly and only in exceptional cases where the allegations, taken at face value, disclose no offence or where intervention is needed to prevent abuse of process. A court should not ordinarily halt a police investigation at a premature stage, and prior departmental inquiries do not bar criminal investigation because they are distinct in object and consequence. The existence of an arbitration clause also does not exclude criminal law where the allegations disclose criminality. The quashing of the preliminary investigation was therefore unjustified, and the investigation was restored to proceed in accordance with law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 19 Mar 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287751</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>