https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295074 A second application under Section 482 CrPC seeking the same de-freezing relief after an earlier application had been withdrawn without pressing that prayer was held to be an abuse of process and not maintainable. The Court reasoned that re-agitating a relief already given up could not be permitted, so the High Court ought not to have entertained the later application. The impugned order allowing de-freezing was set aside and the criminal application stood dismissed. The broader question whether the bank accounts could otherwise have been frozen under the Code or the special enactment was left open. en-us Thu, 07 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 18 May 2021 08:29:31 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295074 A second application under Section 482 CrPC seeking the same de-freezing relief after an earlier application had been withdrawn without pressing that prayer was held to be an abuse of process and not maintainable. The Court reasoned that re-agitating a relief already given up could not be permitted, so the High Court ought not to have entertained the later application. The impugned order allowing de-freezing was set aside and the criminal application stood dismissed. The broader question whether the bank accounts could otherwise have been frozen under the Code or the special enactment was left open. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 07 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295074