CrPC s.482

CrPC s.482 — the law in short

What the courts have decided on section CrPC s.482, in one screen. Read this first; open an entry when you need the facts, the reasoning and the source.

• H.J. Siwani v Income Tax Department High CourtHelps departmentNo later treatment found
  The sanction for my prosecution covers a Black Money Act offence too. Can I get the whole complaint quashed for want of a valid s.55 sanction?
  Not on these facts. The Karnataka High Court held the s.55 point academic because the trial court, while taking cognizance of the Income-tax Act offences, did not take cognizance of the offence under s.50 of the Black Money Act at all. Whether the sanction that was granted is in accordance with law is for the Special Court to decide at trial, not for a petition under s.482 CrPC.
• Sanjay Bhandari v Income Tax Office High CourtHelps departmentNo later treatment found
  The assessment under the Black Money Act is not complete, and may now be time-barred. Can they still summon me on a s.51 complaint?
  Yes. The Delhi High Court refused to quash the summoning order, holding that Chapter V of the Black Money Act stands independent of any order made under the Act, so the initiation of prosecution is not dependent on the completion of assessment provided the ingredients of s.51 are made out. Sections 50 and 51 operate in different realms, and whether the conduct was preparation or a punishable attempt is a matter for trial.
• Arvind Balkrishna Gogte v Income Tax Department High CourtHelps taxpayerNo later treatment found
  My foreign company was struck off and the bank account closed years before the Black Money Act commenced. Can they still prosecute me for it?
  Not on this authority. The Karnataka High Court quashed eight complaints under ss.50 and 52 of the Black Money Act where the foreign company had been struck off and the Singapore account closed in 2010, holding that the deeming fiction in s.72(c) cannot be stretched to found criminal liability for conduct that preceded the Act. Article 20(1) bars conviction under a law not actually in force when the act was done, and a statutory deeming that the asset was acquired in the year of the s.10 notice does not supply that.
• Sandeep Miglani v Union of India High CourtHelps departmentNo later treatment found
  The Special Court summoned me on a benami complaint without examining the complainant, and I live outside its jurisdiction. Can I get the summoning order quashed?
  Not on that ground. Where the complaint is made by a public servant acting in discharge of his official duties, the proviso to s.200 CrPC relieves the court of the need to examine the complainant and his witnesses. Section 202 CrPC does not prescribe how the inquiry is to be held, and perusal of the averments in the complaint together with the documents filed with it satisfies it. The application under s.482 CrPC was dismissed.

Listed strongest first: Supreme Court, then High Court, then Tribunal, then CBDT. Nothing here has yet been read in full by a chartered accountant — open an entry to see where it came from.