<?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>2004 (3) TMI 830 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=310410</link>
    <description>Section 205 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 empowers a Magistrate to permit an accused to be represented by counsel without first appearing personally, where the circumstances justify exemption from personal attendance. The Court held that, in the nature of the case, the accused could appear through an advocate before his first personal appearance and that the Magistrate had discretion to grant such exemption. The accused was required to file a written undertaking before the trial court not to dispute his identity and to accept that the trial would proceed in his absence. The request for representation without prior personal appearance was therefore allowed, and exemption was directed to be granted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 24 Mar 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 23 Oct 2023 11:19:37 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=730037" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (3) TMI 830 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=310410</link>
      <description>Section 205 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 empowers a Magistrate to permit an accused to be represented by counsel without first appearing personally, where the circumstances justify exemption from personal attendance. The Court held that, in the nature of the case, the accused could appear through an advocate before his first personal appearance and that the Magistrate had discretion to grant such exemption. The accused was required to file a written undertaking before the trial court not to dispute his identity and to accept that the trial would proceed in his absence. The request for representation without prior personal appearance was therefore allowed, and exemption was directed to be granted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 24 Mar 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=310410</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>