<?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>2026 (4) TMI 1667 - JHARKHAND HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=790598</link>
    <description>Inherent criminal jurisdiction is wide but must be exercised sparingly to prevent abuse of process or secure the ends of justice, and it cannot ordinarily replace the statutory revisional remedy. A composite challenge to separate stage-specific orders taking cognizance, refusing discharge, framing charges, and continuing the criminal proceeding was held impermissible where the petitioner had not pursued revision within limitation and the trial had already advanced. The attempt to convert the belated petition into a criminal revision was also declined, as the filing sought to bypass the revisional scheme and reopen issues at an advanced stage of trial.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 22 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 28 Apr 2026 07:29:26 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=898805" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (4) TMI 1667 - JHARKHAND HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=790598</link>
      <description>Inherent criminal jurisdiction is wide but must be exercised sparingly to prevent abuse of process or secure the ends of justice, and it cannot ordinarily replace the statutory revisional remedy. A composite challenge to separate stage-specific orders taking cognizance, refusing discharge, framing charges, and continuing the criminal proceeding was held impermissible where the petitioner had not pursued revision within limitation and the trial had already advanced. The attempt to convert the belated petition into a criminal revision was also declined, as the filing sought to bypass the revisional scheme and reopen issues at an advanced stage of trial.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Money Laundering</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 22 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=790598</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>