<?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>2021 (5) TMI 1080 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=312504</link>
    <description>Revisional interference against an order framing charge or refusing discharge is not excluded merely because the order is interlocutory; a High Court may intervene in an exceptional case to correct patent jurisdictional error or prevent abuse of process. A discharge application requires a real assessment of broad probabilities, the total effect of the material, and basic infirmities, rather than a mechanical approach. The text states that the High Court should have examined the revision on merits, including the fairness of the investigation and alleged improvements in witness statements, instead of limiting itself to jurisdiction. The order was set aside and the matter remitted for fresh consideration in accordance with law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 07 May 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 22 Feb 2024 05:51:51 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=744396" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (5) TMI 1080 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=312504</link>
      <description>Revisional interference against an order framing charge or refusing discharge is not excluded merely because the order is interlocutory; a High Court may intervene in an exceptional case to correct patent jurisdictional error or prevent abuse of process. A discharge application requires a real assessment of broad probabilities, the total effect of the material, and basic infirmities, rather than a mechanical approach. The text states that the High Court should have examined the revision on merits, including the fairness of the investigation and alleged improvements in witness statements, instead of limiting itself to jurisdiction. The order was set aside and the matter remitted for fresh consideration in accordance with law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 07 May 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=312504</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>