<?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>1972 (1) TMI 119 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303208</link>
    <description>Section 83 of the Indian Registration Act was construed as an enabling provision that applies when an offence comes to the knowledge of a registering officer in an official capacity. It does not create a mandatory bar to prosecution by a private person, and permission under that section was not a prerequisite to maintain the complaint under Section 82. The Court rejected the argument that Section 83 prescribed the only valid mode of prosecution, holding instead that it merely protects specified officers when they initiate proceedings. On that objection, the complaint remained competent and the conviction was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 18 Jan 1972 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 08 Jul 2022 17:20:25 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=684438" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1972 (1) TMI 119 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303208</link>
      <description>Section 83 of the Indian Registration Act was construed as an enabling provision that applies when an offence comes to the knowledge of a registering officer in an official capacity. It does not create a mandatory bar to prosecution by a private person, and permission under that section was not a prerequisite to maintain the complaint under Section 82. The Court rejected the argument that Section 83 prescribed the only valid mode of prosecution, holding instead that it merely protects specified officers when they initiate proceedings. On that objection, the complaint remained competent and the conviction was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 18 Jan 1972 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303208</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>