<?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>2017 (2) TMI 1530 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=305366</link>
    <description>The scope of inherent power under Section 482 CrPC to quash criminal proceedings on the basis of settlement, including where non-compoundable offences are involved, must be assessed on the facts and circumstances of each case. The statutory bar in Section 320(9) CrPC and the principle of judicial restraint remain relevant, but earlier decisions recognise that compromise may justify quashing in appropriate cases. On the facts considered, the Supreme Court declined to interfere with the High Court&#039;s quashing order, so the criminal proceedings were not restored and the appeal failed, while the broader question of law was left open.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 23 Feb 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 01 Dec 2022 10:23:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=697291" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (2) TMI 1530 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=305366</link>
      <description>The scope of inherent power under Section 482 CrPC to quash criminal proceedings on the basis of settlement, including where non-compoundable offences are involved, must be assessed on the facts and circumstances of each case. The statutory bar in Section 320(9) CrPC and the principle of judicial restraint remain relevant, but earlier decisions recognise that compromise may justify quashing in appropriate cases. On the facts considered, the Supreme Court declined to interfere with the High Court&#039;s quashing order, so the criminal proceedings were not restored and the appeal failed, while the broader question of law was left open.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 23 Feb 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=305366</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>