<?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>2000 (4) TMI 856 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=314103</link>
    <description>Section 91 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is an enabling power to summon documents or things only when they are necessary or desirable for investigation, inquiry, trial or other proceedings. At the pre-charge stage, the court need not conduct a roving enquiry or permit production of material as a matter of course; relevance to the issue before the court and the stage of proceedings remain decisive. Interference with the trial court&#039;s discretion is justified only if the discretion is exercised in a demonstrably unreasonable or improper manner. On that basis, refusal to summon the documents was treated as a proper exercise of discretion and no interference was warranted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 24 Apr 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 17 May 2024 16:37:15 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=753469" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (4) TMI 856 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=314103</link>
      <description>Section 91 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is an enabling power to summon documents or things only when they are necessary or desirable for investigation, inquiry, trial or other proceedings. At the pre-charge stage, the court need not conduct a roving enquiry or permit production of material as a matter of course; relevance to the issue before the court and the stage of proceedings remain decisive. Interference with the trial court&#039;s discretion is justified only if the discretion is exercised in a demonstrably unreasonable or improper manner. On that basis, refusal to summon the documents was treated as a proper exercise of discretion and no interference was warranted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 24 Apr 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=314103</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>