<?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>2021 (1) TMI 1361 - UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=466808</link>
    <description>Sanction under Section 197 CrPC was held unnecessary where the alleged acts involved interpolation of records, cheating, wrongful payments and fraudulent appointments, because such conduct was not part of discharge of official duty. On the charge-framing issue, the Court found the material in the two charge-sheets sufficient to disclose a prima facie case, including allegations of criminal conspiracy and wrongful payment under the contract matter. The charges under the Penal Code and the Prevention of Corruption Act were therefore sustained, and no case for discharge was made out. The revision failed on both grounds and the trial court&#039;s order was affirmed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 25 Jan 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 20 Feb 2026 20:59:03 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=887342" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (1) TMI 1361 - UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=466808</link>
      <description>Sanction under Section 197 CrPC was held unnecessary where the alleged acts involved interpolation of records, cheating, wrongful payments and fraudulent appointments, because such conduct was not part of discharge of official duty. On the charge-framing issue, the Court found the material in the two charge-sheets sufficient to disclose a prima facie case, including allegations of criminal conspiracy and wrongful payment under the contract matter. The charges under the Penal Code and the Prevention of Corruption Act were therefore sustained, and no case for discharge was made out. The revision failed on both grounds and the trial court&#039;s order was affirmed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 25 Jan 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=466808</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>