https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=301427 A fresh complaint based on the same alleged offences was treated as an abuse of process where the pending complaint could, on evidence, support summoning additional persons under Section 319 CrPC. The court reasoned that cognizance attaches to the offence, not to every offender being identified at the outset, and that a second cognizance on identical facts would bypass the evidentiary safeguard available in the existing trial. In these circumstances, the inherent power under Section 482 CrPC may be used to prevent prejudice to the accused and to stop duplicative proceedings. The second proceeding was therefore held not maintainable and liable to be quashed. en-us Fri, 19 Jul 1991 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 04 Apr 2022 16:51:43 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=301427 A fresh complaint based on the same alleged offences was treated as an abuse of process where the pending complaint could, on evidence, support summoning additional persons under Section 319 CrPC. The court reasoned that cognizance attaches to the offence, not to every offender being identified at the outset, and that a second cognizance on identical facts would bypass the evidentiary safeguard available in the existing trial. In these circumstances, the inherent power under Section 482 CrPC may be used to prevent prejudice to the accused and to stop duplicative proceedings. The second proceeding was therefore held not maintainable and liable to be quashed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 19 Jul 1991 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=301427