<?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 (5) TMI 2284 - UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=468799</link>
    <description>Where complaint proceedings had already commenced before the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 came into force, Section 531(2)(a) saved the earlier criminal procedure and required the matter to continue under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The first proviso to Section 223, which requires an opportunity of hearing to the accused before cognizance, was therefore held inapplicable to such pending proceedings. On the facts noted, the complaint and initiation of proceedings predated the new Sanhita, so the cognizance order was tested under the earlier regime. The challenge to cognizance failed and the revision was rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 19 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 21 May 2026 18:59:15 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=903179" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (5) TMI 2284 - UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=468799</link>
      <description>Where complaint proceedings had already commenced before the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 came into force, Section 531(2)(a) saved the earlier criminal procedure and required the matter to continue under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The first proviso to Section 223, which requires an opportunity of hearing to the accused before cognizance, was therefore held inapplicable to such pending proceedings. On the facts noted, the complaint and initiation of proceedings predated the new Sanhita, so the cognizance order was tested under the earlier regime. The challenge to cognizance failed and the revision was rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Money Laundering</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 19 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=468799</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>