<?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>2001 (8) TMI 1440 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=301127</link>
    <description>Section 160 CrPC empowers an investigating police officer to require attendance only of a person acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the case who is within the limits of the officer&#039;s own police station or an adjoining station. The provision operates territorially and does not authorise a summons to a person residing outside that local area. As the witness was residing at Hyderabad and not within the concerned police station area at Pune or any adjoining station, the direction to attend at Pune exceeded statutory power. The summons was therefore held illegal and void, and the writ petition was allowed with costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 23 Aug 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 14 Mar 2022 10:58:38 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=672837" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (8) TMI 1440 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=301127</link>
      <description>Section 160 CrPC empowers an investigating police officer to require attendance only of a person acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the case who is within the limits of the officer&#039;s own police station or an adjoining station. The provision operates territorially and does not authorise a summons to a person residing outside that local area. As the witness was residing at Hyderabad and not within the concerned police station area at Pune or any adjoining station, the direction to attend at Pune exceeded statutory power. The summons was therefore held illegal and void, and the writ petition was allowed with costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 23 Aug 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=301127</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>