<?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>2005 (3) TMI 139 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47387</link>
    <description>A complaint filed before a Magistrate lacking territorial jurisdiction must be returned to the proper court under Section 201 CrPC for presentation before the competent forum. The jurisdictional defect does not affect the merits of the accusation and does not, by itself, amount to discharge or acquittal. An order treating the matter as finally disposed of on that basis cannot stand, because the prosecution remains open to be tried by the court having jurisdiction.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 22 Mar 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 28 Jul 2010 15:16:04 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=85906" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (3) TMI 139 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47387</link>
      <description>A complaint filed before a Magistrate lacking territorial jurisdiction must be returned to the proper court under Section 201 CrPC for presentation before the competent forum. The jurisdictional defect does not affect the merits of the accusation and does not, by itself, amount to discharge or acquittal. An order treating the matter as finally disposed of on that basis cannot stand, because the prosecution remains open to be tried by the court having jurisdiction.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 22 Mar 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47387</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>