Rectification of mistake remains limited to self-evident record errors, preventing merits review through miscellaneous applications and preserving fin...
Tender creditworthiness conditions may extend to de facto Promoter Directors, with post-participation challenges generally barred absent arbitrariness...
Corporate representation in PMLA summons proceedings permitted through an authorised signatory, subject to directors' continuing cooperation and atten...
Helicopter charter classification requires effective control analysis, while territorial performance, reasoned credit orders and wilful suppression de...
Specified fund definition expands PAN exemption eligibility for registered alternative investment funds and qualifying International Financial Service...
Tax exemption for specified legal-services authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and...
The Supreme Court held that an application for anticipatory bail u/s 438 of the CrPC is maintainable even when the accused is in judicial custody in connection with a different case. The purpose of Section 438 is to safeguard personal liberty and the presumption of innocence. While there is no fundamental right to anticipatory bail, the court should not deprive the accused of exercising this statutory right until their release from custody in the first offense. Doing so may enable investigating agencies to arrest the accused immediately upon release, denying them the opportunity to seek anticipatory bail. The court clarified the procedure for arrest in such cases and emphasized that no restriction can be read into Section 438 to preclude an accused from applying for anticipatory bail while in custody for a different offense, as it would go against the provision's intent. The only restriction is under sub-section (4) of Section 438 or other statutes.
The Supreme Court held that an application for anticipatory bail u/s 438 of the CrPC is maintainable even when the accused is in judicial custody in connection with a different case. The purpose of Section 438 is to safeguard personal liberty and the presumption of innocence. While there is no fundamental right to anticipatory bail, the court should not deprive the accused of exercising this statutory right until their release from custody in the first offense. Doing so may enable investigating agencies to arrest the accused immediately upon release, denying them the opportunity to seek anticipatory bail. The court clarified the procedure for arrest in such cases and emphasized that no restriction can be read into Section 438 to preclude an accused from applying for anticipatory bail while in custody for a different offense, as it would go against the provision's intent. The only restriction is under sub-section (4) of Section 438 or other statutes.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4788
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
