<?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 527 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289836</link>
    <description>A writ petition to quash an FIR, stay arrest and halt investigation at the threshold was held not maintainable in the circumstances. The Court reiterated that registration of an FIR sets the criminal law in motion and that police are entitled to investigate cognizable offences under the Code of Criminal Procedure. High Court interference to quash an FIR or restrain investigation is justified only in exceptional cases, such as where the allegations on their face do not disclose a cognizable offence or where continuation would amount to abuse of process. Extraordinary relief under Article 226 was therefore refused, and the investigation was allowed to proceed in accordance with law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 08 Apr 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 25 Aug 2020 16:12:48 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=620524" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1996 (4) TMI 527 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289836</link>
      <description>A writ petition to quash an FIR, stay arrest and halt investigation at the threshold was held not maintainable in the circumstances. The Court reiterated that registration of an FIR sets the criminal law in motion and that police are entitled to investigate cognizable offences under the Code of Criminal Procedure. High Court interference to quash an FIR or restrain investigation is justified only in exceptional cases, such as where the allegations on their face do not disclose a cognizable offence or where continuation would amount to abuse of process. Extraordinary relief under Article 226 was therefore refused, and the investigation was allowed to proceed in accordance with law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 08 Apr 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289836</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>