https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168296 Unauthorised conscious possession of specified arms or ammunition in a notified area under TADA was construed to raise a rebuttable presumption of terrorist or disruptive nexus, but the accused could rebut it by proving the possession was wholly unrelated to such activity; failing that, liability would fall only under the general law. The default-bail right under Section 20(4)(bb) was held to exist only until filing of the challan, after which ordinary bail provisions govern. The notice requirement for extension of investigation time was satisfied by producing the accused before the court and informing him that extension was being considered. No further clarification was issued on the settled bail conditions under Section 20(8). en-us Thu, 18 Aug 1994 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 16 Feb 2015 15:16:53 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168296 Unauthorised conscious possession of specified arms or ammunition in a notified area under TADA was construed to raise a rebuttable presumption of terrorist or disruptive nexus, but the accused could rebut it by proving the possession was wholly unrelated to such activity; failing that, liability would fall only under the general law. The default-bail right under Section 20(4)(bb) was held to exist only until filing of the challan, after which ordinary bail provisions govern. The notice requirement for extension of investigation time was satisfied by producing the accused before the court and informing him that extension was being considered. No further clarification was issued on the settled bail conditions under Section 20(8). Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 18 Aug 1994 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168296