<?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>2025 (1) TMI 133 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=764071</link>
    <description>On State reorganisation, existing laws, notifications, government orders and consent arrangements continue in the successor States until altered, repealed or amended. Applying that principle, the text states that earlier general consent for CBI investigation and later extending orders remained effective after bifurcation, so CBI authority to register and investigate the FIRs was not defeated merely because the offences involved State employees or occurred in districts within Andhra Pradesh. It also states that the notification conferring jurisdiction on the Hyderabad Special Judge continued to operate, so the court&#039;s jurisdiction and the ensuing proceedings were not invalidated on reorganisation grounds.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 02 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 03 Jan 2025 08:45:45 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=786114" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (1) TMI 133 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=764071</link>
      <description>On State reorganisation, existing laws, notifications, government orders and consent arrangements continue in the successor States until altered, repealed or amended. Applying that principle, the text states that earlier general consent for CBI investigation and later extending orders remained effective after bifurcation, so CBI authority to register and investigate the FIRs was not defeated merely because the offences involved State employees or occurred in districts within Andhra Pradesh. It also states that the notification conferring jurisdiction on the Hyderabad Special Judge continued to operate, so the court&#039;s jurisdiction and the ensuing proceedings were not invalidated on reorganisation grounds.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 02 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=764071</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>