<?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>2006 (6) TMI 535 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=300024</link>
    <description>Availability of a revisional remedy before the Sessions Court does not create an absolute bar to a High Court petition under Article 227 of the Constitution read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The inherent and supervisory jurisdictions remain available, though Section 482 should be exercised sparingly and in exceptional cases where intervention is needed to prevent abuse of process or secure the ends of justice. Earlier authorities on revision were treated as recognising revision as an appropriate remedy in suitable cases, not as excluding High Court jurisdiction altogether. The petition was therefore held maintainable and entertained under Section 482 read with Article 227.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 14 Jun 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 08 Jan 2022 13:12:48 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=666600" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (6) TMI 535 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=300024</link>
      <description>Availability of a revisional remedy before the Sessions Court does not create an absolute bar to a High Court petition under Article 227 of the Constitution read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The inherent and supervisory jurisdictions remain available, though Section 482 should be exercised sparingly and in exceptional cases where intervention is needed to prevent abuse of process or secure the ends of justice. Earlier authorities on revision were treated as recognising revision as an appropriate remedy in suitable cases, not as excluding High Court jurisdiction altogether. The petition was therefore held maintainable and entertained under Section 482 read with Article 227.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 14 Jun 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=300024</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>