<?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>2015 (9) TMI 764 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=264096</link>
    <description>The High Court held that the appellant&#039;s rights under Section 50 of the NDPS Act were not properly explained during the search and seizure process. As a result, the recovery of contraband was deemed illegal, leading to the invalidation of the conviction and sentence. The court allowed the appeal, setting aside the conviction and sentence, and ordered the cancellation of the appellant&#039;s bail bonds.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 03 Dec 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 14 Sep 2015 15:11:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=397629" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (9) TMI 764 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=264096</link>
      <description>The High Court held that the appellant&#039;s rights under Section 50 of the NDPS Act were not properly explained during the search and seizure process. As a result, the recovery of contraband was deemed illegal, leading to the invalidation of the conviction and sentence. The court allowed the appeal, setting aside the conviction and sentence, and ordered the cancellation of the appellant&#039;s bail bonds.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 03 Dec 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=264096</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>