<?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>2014 (10) TMI 1077 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457168</link>
    <description>The Delhi HC dismissed a PIL seeking CBI investigation into alleged corruption by an Additional Judge of Madras HC based on blog statements. The court noted the judge&#039;s appointment validity was already examined by SC in Shanti Bhushan v. Union of India, the controversy was resolved, and the judge had retired and deceased by 2009. The HC held no substantial public interest existed to warrant CBI investigation based on blog allegations, emphasizing PIL must address genuine public harm for unrepresented sections of society.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 14 Oct 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 09 Sep 2024 20:02:10 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=767315" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (10) TMI 1077 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457168</link>
      <description>The Delhi HC dismissed a PIL seeking CBI investigation into alleged corruption by an Additional Judge of Madras HC based on blog statements. The court noted the judge&#039;s appointment validity was already examined by SC in Shanti Bhushan v. Union of India, the controversy was resolved, and the judge had retired and deceased by 2009. The HC held no substantial public interest existed to warrant CBI investigation based on blog allegations, emphasizing PIL must address genuine public harm for unrepresented sections of society.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 14 Oct 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457168</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>