https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313129 Previous sanction for prosecution under Clause 23 of the Cotton Cloth and Yarn (Control) Order, 1943 was valid only if the sanctioning authority was shown to have been informed of the facts constituting the alleged offence. The sanction need not set out those facts on its face, but where it does not, admissible extraneous evidence must prove that they were placed before the authority. On the record described, no such proof was produced and relevant documents under the prosecution's control were not placed in evidence, so the sanction was invalid. The defect went to jurisdiction and could not be cured as a mere irregularity under Section 537 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898; the acquittal was restored. en-us Tue, 13 Jan 1948 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 27 Mar 2024 17:49:57 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313129 Previous sanction for prosecution under Clause 23 of the Cotton Cloth and Yarn (Control) Order, 1943 was valid only if the sanctioning authority was shown to have been informed of the facts constituting the alleged offence. The sanction need not set out those facts on its face, but where it does not, admissible extraneous evidence must prove that they were placed before the authority. On the record described, no such proof was produced and relevant documents under the prosecution's control were not placed in evidence, so the sanction was invalid. The defect went to jurisdiction and could not be cured as a mere irregularity under Section 537 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898; the acquittal was restored. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 13 Jan 1948 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313129