1992 (1) TMI 75

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....0.90 for the assessment year 1983-84. An assessment, exhibit R-2, dated January 7, 1986, was made, rejecting the return filed and adding a suppressed income of Rs. 1,47,888. The petitioners appealed against that order unsuccessfully. The appeal was rejected on September 5, 1986, by exhibit R-2(a). Thereafter, a second appeal was filed before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. While so, the petitioners filed another return dated March 21, 1987, purportedly in terms of exhibit P-1 circular dated February 13, 1986, and withdrew the appeal filed by them before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. The petitioners submit that the scheme covers past years also and that they had acted on a promise contained in the circulars. The Revenue cannot ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....987 cannot be granted. There is no provision in the Code of Criminal Procedure or in any other law for withdrawing a private complaint. May be, there are cases where the court can drop it., as indicated in K M. Mathew v. State of Kerala [1992] 1 KLT 1 (SC). An accused person has no right in him to seek withdrawal of a criminal complaint. For the same reason, direction cannot be issued to restrain the respondents from proceeding with the criminal complaint. The criminal court is in seisin of the case, and it is upto it to deal with the case in accordance with law. In a situation where facts are in dispute, this court will not invoke its extraordinary jurisdiction under article 226 to adjudicate on disputed questions of fact. As observed by t....