<?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>2005 (4) TMI 648 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311799</link>
    <description>A criminal defamation conviction under Section 500 IPC was set aside after the parties&#039; settlement was accepted and the offence was permitted to be compounded under Section 320(5) CrPC. A joint compounding application supported by affidavits and settlement terms was filed, and the Court found the compromise acceptable. Once compounding was allowed, the conviction could not survive, and the appellants were acquitted of the offence.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 26 Apr 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 13 Jan 2024 18:25:44 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=739993" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (4) TMI 648 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311799</link>
      <description>A criminal defamation conviction under Section 500 IPC was set aside after the parties&#039; settlement was accepted and the offence was permitted to be compounded under Section 320(5) CrPC. A joint compounding application supported by affidavits and settlement terms was filed, and the Court found the compromise acceptable. Once compounding was allowed, the conviction could not survive, and the appellants were acquitted of the offence.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 26 Apr 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311799</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>