<?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>1965 (11) TMI 160 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=307437</link>
    <description>A statutory appointment to the office of special police officer may be made by virtue of office, not only by name, where the governing Act does not require personal selection and permits appointment by the State Government for the specified area and rank. The Act also permits subordinate officers to assist in investigation under the special police officer&#039;s direction and supervision, so every investigative step need not be performed personally by that officer. A defect in investigation does not vitiate the trial unless prejudice or miscarriage of justice is shown; on these grounds, the conviction and sentence were upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 04 Nov 1965 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 13 Apr 2023 17:39:09 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=710615" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1965 (11) TMI 160 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=307437</link>
      <description>A statutory appointment to the office of special police officer may be made by virtue of office, not only by name, where the governing Act does not require personal selection and permits appointment by the State Government for the specified area and rank. The Act also permits subordinate officers to assist in investigation under the special police officer&#039;s direction and supervision, so every investigative step need not be performed personally by that officer. A defect in investigation does not vitiate the trial unless prejudice or miscarriage of justice is shown; on these grounds, the conviction and sentence were upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 04 Nov 1965 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=307437</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>