https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779751 Criminal proceedings were sustained because the record disclosed a prima facie case of conspiracy, cheating by impersonation, forgery of records and falsification of accounts, and the court declined to interfere at the quashing stage. The challenge to CBI jurisdiction also failed, the issue having already been settled against the petitioner on the basis of consent under the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act. The request for copies of seized documents was rejected because the documents were not shown to form part of the charge-sheet and no prejudice from non-supply was demonstrated. Both challenges were found without merit. en-us Wed, 08 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 13 Oct 2025 08:53:59 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779751 Criminal proceedings were sustained because the record disclosed a prima facie case of conspiracy, cheating by impersonation, forgery of records and falsification of accounts, and the court declined to interfere at the quashing stage. The challenge to CBI jurisdiction also failed, the issue having already been settled against the petitioner on the basis of consent under the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act. The request for copies of seized documents was rejected because the documents were not shown to form part of the charge-sheet and no prejudice from non-supply was demonstrated. Both challenges were found without merit. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 08 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779751