<?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>1996 (2) TMI 598 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=309193</link>
    <description>A person storing edible oils without the required licence fell within the control orders&#039; definition of &quot;dealer&quot; because the orders covered business activity involving purchase, sale or storage for sale of oilseeds or edible oils. The complaint alleged storage of substantial quantities of soyabean, refined soyabean and castor oil and therefore disclosed the essential ingredients of an offence under the Essential Commodities Act. The Supreme Court also reiterated that the inherent power under Section 482 CrPC is exceptional and should be used sparingly, especially where a prima facie cognisable offence is made out and investigation is at an early stage. The FIR should not have been quashed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 06 Feb 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Jan 2025 15:58:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=722742" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1996 (2) TMI 598 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=309193</link>
      <description>A person storing edible oils without the required licence fell within the control orders&#039; definition of &quot;dealer&quot; because the orders covered business activity involving purchase, sale or storage for sale of oilseeds or edible oils. The complaint alleged storage of substantial quantities of soyabean, refined soyabean and castor oil and therefore disclosed the essential ingredients of an offence under the Essential Commodities Act. The Supreme Court also reiterated that the inherent power under Section 482 CrPC is exceptional and should be used sparingly, especially where a prima facie cognisable offence is made out and investigation is at an early stage. The FIR should not have been quashed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 06 Feb 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=309193</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>