<?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>2009 (4) TMI 1056 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=307704</link>
    <description>Section 482 CrPC confers only limited inherent power and cannot be used to displace the Magistrate&#039;s statutory discretion on bail or exemption from personal appearance. The High Court should not pre-empt those matters in a quashing proceeding, and its directions on bail and appearance were therefore unsustainable. The text also confirms that further investigation remains permissible even after filing of a final report and cognizance, subject to judicial supervision and the Magistrate&#039;s final control. On that basis, interference with the order permitting further investigation was set aside and the matter was remitted for fresh consideration, with all contentions left open.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 15 Apr 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 01 May 2023 10:17:19 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=712289" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (4) TMI 1056 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=307704</link>
      <description>Section 482 CrPC confers only limited inherent power and cannot be used to displace the Magistrate&#039;s statutory discretion on bail or exemption from personal appearance. The High Court should not pre-empt those matters in a quashing proceeding, and its directions on bail and appearance were therefore unsustainable. The text also confirms that further investigation remains permissible even after filing of a final report and cognizance, subject to judicial supervision and the Magistrate&#039;s final control. On that basis, interference with the order permitting further investigation was set aside and the matter was remitted for fresh consideration, with all contentions left open.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 15 Apr 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=307704</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>