https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=305176 Complaint proceedings were not liable to be quashed where the complaint was originally presented within limitation and later returned only for curing defects, including deficit court fee. The return and re-presentation were treated as administrative processing, so the original filing date continued to govern limitation under the principle that an act of court should not prejudice a litigant. The accused could not object to the complainant correcting defects before cognizance, and once the trial had commenced, quashment was found inappropriate in the absence of a valid ground for interference under inherent jurisdiction. en-us Fri, 05 Oct 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 21 Nov 2022 14:44:38 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=305176 Complaint proceedings were not liable to be quashed where the complaint was originally presented within limitation and later returned only for curing defects, including deficit court fee. The return and re-presentation were treated as administrative processing, so the original filing date continued to govern limitation under the principle that an act of court should not prejudice a litigant. The accused could not object to the complainant correcting defects before cognizance, and once the trial had commenced, quashment was found inappropriate in the absence of a valid ground for interference under inherent jurisdiction. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 05 Oct 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=305176