https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211470 A challenge to extension orders for filing the charge-sheet and refusal of default bail under Section 167(2) of the Code read with Section 36A(4) of the NDPS Act failed where the Chemical Analyst's report contention had not been raised before the Special Court and could not ordinarily be entertained for the first time in writ or supervisory jurisdiction. The Court held that later filing of the charge-sheet did not invalidate earlier extension orders, because their validity had to be tested on the material available when made. Precedent cited by the petitioner was distinguished on facts, as no material showed that the Public Prosecutor had failed to apply an independent mind while seeking extension, and the refusal of bail was upheld. en-us Mon, 07 Feb 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 20 Mar 2012 13:00:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211470 A challenge to extension orders for filing the charge-sheet and refusal of default bail under Section 167(2) of the Code read with Section 36A(4) of the NDPS Act failed where the Chemical Analyst's report contention had not been raised before the Special Court and could not ordinarily be entertained for the first time in writ or supervisory jurisdiction. The Court held that later filing of the charge-sheet did not invalidate earlier extension orders, because their validity had to be tested on the material available when made. Precedent cited by the petitioner was distinguished on facts, as no material showed that the Public Prosecutor had failed to apply an independent mind while seeking extension, and the refusal of bail was upheld. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 07 Feb 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211470