TaxTMI Login
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Just a moment...
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in view of the filing of the complaint, attachment of properties, and the claimed absence of need for custodial interrogation.
Analysis: The application was under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The Court noted that the complaint had already been filed, the properties stood attached, and custodial interrogation of the petitioner was not required. On these facts, the Court found it appropriate to exercise discretion in favour of pre-arrest bail.
Conclusion: Anticipatory bail was granted.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
