<?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>2015 (9) TMI 1711 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296324</link>
    <description>Under Section 319 CrPC, a person may be summoned as an additional accused only on strong and cogent evidence, not a mere prima facie case. The FIR named the petitioners, and the complainant&#039;s testimony before the court specifically attributed the assault to them. On that record, the HC held that direct allegations existed to justify summoning them as additional accused, and the challenge to the summoning order failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 24 Sep 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 15 Jul 2021 08:00:44 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=649682" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (9) TMI 1711 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296324</link>
      <description>Under Section 319 CrPC, a person may be summoned as an additional accused only on strong and cogent evidence, not a mere prima facie case. The FIR named the petitioners, and the complainant&#039;s testimony before the court specifically attributed the assault to them. On that record, the HC held that direct allegations existed to justify summoning them as additional accused, and the challenge to the summoning order failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 24 Sep 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296324</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>