<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2011 (12) TMI 341 - Bombay High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211642</link>
    <description>For NDPS offences involving opium, the recovered substance must be assessed under the statutory definition of opium and the applicable notification, rather than by reference only to morphine content. On the material described, the dark brown sticky mass with opium characteristics and opium alkaloids was treated as opium, and the entire 14.5 kg recovery was held to constitute commercial quantity. Once commercial quantity was involved, the stringent bail restrictions under Section 37 applied, requiring satisfaction that the accused was not guilty and would not reoffend on bail. The bail order was found to have ignored this statutory embargo and was set aside, with cancellation of bail directed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 12 Dec 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 12 Mar 2012 15:46:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=185059" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (12) TMI 341 - Bombay High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211642</link>
      <description>For NDPS offences involving opium, the recovered substance must be assessed under the statutory definition of opium and the applicable notification, rather than by reference only to morphine content. On the material described, the dark brown sticky mass with opium characteristics and opium alkaloids was treated as opium, and the entire 14.5 kg recovery was held to constitute commercial quantity. Once commercial quantity was involved, the stringent bail restrictions under Section 37 applied, requiring satisfaction that the accused was not guilty and would not reoffend on bail. The bail order was found to have ignored this statutory embargo and was set aside, with cancellation of bail directed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 12 Dec 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211642</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>