Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the petitioners were entitled to pre-arrest bail in a case alleging attempted tax evasion and use of fabricated bills, and whether the protection should extend to the subsequently added offences under Sections 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
Analysis: The petitioners were not apprehended at the spot and had already joined investigation. The allegations arose from interception of trucks carrying iron scrap and a claim of evasion of tax under the Punjab VAT regime. In these circumstances, the Court found no present necessity to deny pre-arrest protection. The order also recorded that the added offences under Sections 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 would be covered by the same protection.
Conclusion: The petitioners were held entitled to pre-arrest bail, subject to the stated conditions, and the protection was made operative for the subsequently added offences as well.