Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
JITENDRA JAIN
Shah Rameshchandra Nihalchand & Co. – Appellant
Versus
S. Bose Commissioner of Tax-13 – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of applications and parties involved. (Para 1 , 2 , 7 , 8 , 10) |
| 2. evidence gathering and appearance of respondents dictates court procedure. (Para 3 , 5) |
| 3. motion for adding accused under section 319 requires judicial scrutiny. (Para 6) |
| 4. prior court orders and their significance. (Para 11 , 13 , 14 , 15) |
| 5. arguments against adding applicants as accused. (Para 12 , 16 , 19) |
| 6. conditions for proceeding against additional accused under cr.p.c. (Para 17 , 18 , 20 , 21 , 22) |
| 7. union of sections 278b and 319 regarding firm’s criminal liability. (Para 27 , 29 , 30 , 31) |
| 8. requirement of sanction under income tax act is crucial in legal proceedings. (Para 28) |
| 9. liability arises only under circumstances of involvement in misconduct. (Para 33) |
| 10. final order allowing the revision application. (Para 34 , 35) |
JUDGMENT :
Jitendra Jain, J.
1. The facts and the legal issues involved in these three Applications are identical and therefore, are disposed of by common order, by consent of the parties, by taking Criminal Revision Application No.597 of 2011 as a lead matter.
2. The present Application is filed challenging the order dated 18 November 2011 passed by the learned S
A valid sanction is mandatory for prosecuting partners of a firm under Section 279 of the Income Tax Act; without it, applications under Section 319 of the Cr.P.C. to add accused are invalid.
Section 319 of Cr.P.C reads as power to proceed against other persons appearing to be guilty of offence.
Criminal proceedings under Section 138 of the N.I. Act require the partnership firm to be arraigned as an accused; failure to do so renders the proceedings against individual partners not maintainabl....
A complaint under the Negotiable Instruments Act is not maintainable if the partnership firm is not made a party, as individual partners cannot be liable without arraigning the firm as a principal ac....
The court emphasized the discretionary and extraordinary nature of the power under Section 319 Cr.P.C., requiring stronger evidence than a prima facie case against the accused and the need for specif....
The responsibility of a proprietorship concern, whether represented by the proprietor or proprietrix, and the need for strong and cogent evidence to arraign additional accused under Sec. 319 of the C....
The power under Section 319 Cr.P.C is discretionary and should be exercised sparingly, only when strong and cogent evidence occurs against a person from the evidence led before the court.
Section 319 allows rejoining discharged accused based on evidence in ongoing trial; defining the distinction between inquiry and trial stages.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
