Loading...

⚠ โœ•
❮ Top
☎ Help
Draft upto 3 replies to a
tax notice โ€” FREE ๐ŸŽ‰ โœ•

150 credits ยท 30 days

โ€ข Basic Search โ†’ 1 Credit
โ€ข Advanced Search โ†’ 3 Credits
โ€ข Drafter โ†’ 20 to extract + 25 per issue
(โ‰ˆ upto 2-3 drafts on us)

Already used our earlier 20-Credit Demo?
You are still eligible for this new 150-Credit Demo.

Activate your FREE Demo โ†’
☰
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
Call Us / Help / Feedbackโœ•

Contact Us At :

✉ E-mail: [email protected]

✆ Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters 0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

The court ruled that separate FIRs for different years, amounts, and accused are valid. No fresh investigation for same offense.

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....The High Court considered the legality of clubbing investigations u/s two FIRs involving fraudulent forex remittance using forged documents. Citing T.T. Antoy and Amitbhai Anilchandra Shah cases, it held that no second FIR or fresh investigation is permissible for the same cognizable offence or occurrence. Sections 218, 219, and 202 allow separate charges or clubbing based on transactional link. The distinct nature of defalcation in different treasuries, years, and accused persons warrants separate trials. As the investigations are distinct, the court dismissed the petition to quash or club the FIRs, noting the ongoing progress in the 2022 case and the petitioner's unavailability for the 2017 investigation by CBI.....