<?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>2020 (11) TMI 426 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=400671</link>
    <description>Materials alleged that an appellate authority entertained and decided appeals outside jurisdiction, manipulated or created records, ignored prescribed procedure, and acted with a co-accused, causing wrongful loss to revenue and corresponding gain. On that prima facie basis, the HC held that the record disclosed possible offences of criminal conspiracy, cheating and an offence under the Prevention of Corruption Act. In proceedings under Section 482 CrPC, the Court does not test evidence as at trial or weigh its reliability, and interference is unwarranted where the allegations and material disclose a prima facie case. The petition was therefore rejected and quashing of the charge-sheet, cognizance order and criminal proceedings was declined.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 04 Nov 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 13 Nov 2020 07:57:05 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=627668" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (11) TMI 426 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=400671</link>
      <description>Materials alleged that an appellate authority entertained and decided appeals outside jurisdiction, manipulated or created records, ignored prescribed procedure, and acted with a co-accused, causing wrongful loss to revenue and corresponding gain. On that prima facie basis, the HC held that the record disclosed possible offences of criminal conspiracy, cheating and an offence under the Prevention of Corruption Act. In proceedings under Section 482 CrPC, the Court does not test evidence as at trial or weigh its reliability, and interference is unwarranted where the allegations and material disclose a prima facie case. The petition was therefore rejected and quashing of the charge-sheet, cognizance order and criminal proceedings was declined.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 04 Nov 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=400671</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>