<?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 (7) TMI 1436 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=305387</link>
    <description>A one time settlement cannot extinguish criminal liability where the allegations disclose a coordinated scheme of cheating, forgery and diversion of bank funds. The charge-sheet materials alleged fabricated purchase orders, bills and lorry receipts used to obtain credit facilities, which established a prima facie case of serious economic offences. Quashing or discharge on the basis of settlement is confined to disputes of predominantly civil flavour; it does not apply where the conduct involves fraud, forged documents and wider public consequences. The accused were therefore not entitled to discharge or quashing, and the proceedings were held to continue to trial.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 18 Jul 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 02 Dec 2022 06:28:11 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=697401" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (7) TMI 1436 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=305387</link>
      <description>A one time settlement cannot extinguish criminal liability where the allegations disclose a coordinated scheme of cheating, forgery and diversion of bank funds. The charge-sheet materials alleged fabricated purchase orders, bills and lorry receipts used to obtain credit facilities, which established a prima facie case of serious economic offences. Quashing or discharge on the basis of settlement is confined to disputes of predominantly civil flavour; it does not apply where the conduct involves fraud, forged documents and wider public consequences. The accused were therefore not entitled to discharge or quashing, and the proceedings were held to continue to trial.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 18 Jul 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=305387</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>