S.b. Criminal Misccellaneous (Petition) v. Parinitoo Jain Income Tax Officer
High Court
06 Mar 2018 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · jaipur
Parties
S.b. Criminal Misccellaneous (Petition) v. Parinitoo Jain Income Tax Officer
Date of order
06 Mar 2018
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In S.b. Criminal Misccellaneous (Petition) v. Parinitoo Jain Income Tax Officer, the High Court (2018) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Misccellaneous (Petition) No. 4758/2016M/s Nova Industries And Ors
----Petitioner
Versus
Parinitoo Jain Income Tax Officer
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rajeev SuranaFor Respondent(s): Mr. Aladeen Khan PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIAOrder
06/03/2018
The present petition has been filed to assail the orderdated 11.3.2015 passed by the Additional Chief MetropolitanMagistrate (Economic Offence), Jaipur Metropolitan, Jaipur,whereby charges were framed against the petitioner.
The learned counsel for the petitioner has contendedthat the order framing charges were assailed before the revisionalcourt below and the said revisional court had dismissed therevision on 12.9.2016.
During the course of arguments, the learned counselfor the petitioner has not denied that after framing of charges,evidence of the witnesses has been recorded and now, the case isfixed before the trial court for final arguments. It is well settledlegal proposition that once evidence is recorded, trial has to resultinto conviction or acquittal. After recording of evidence andstatement of the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C., at the stageof final arguments, it will be judicial impropriety to quash charges.
Hence, no interference is warranted and the present petition isdismissed.
In view of order passed above, all the applications filedin the petitions are also dismissed.
(KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA),J
Mak/-
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.