<?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>2004 (8) TMI 714 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=184327</link>
    <description>Preventive detention under COFEPOSA was upheld where the detenu&#039;s own conduct, including retrieval and handing over of concealed contraband and his prior arrangement with another participant, showed independent involvement in abetting smuggling. The release of the other participant did not vitiate the detenu&#039;s detention, because the materials against him were separately assessed and the principle applicable to criminal conviction of an abettor after acquittal of the principal offender was held inapposite. The detaining authority was found to have properly considered the seizure, voluntary statement, concealed transport and prior involvement, and its subjective satisfaction was sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 09 Aug 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 05 Jul 2016 18:35:46 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=433897" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (8) TMI 714 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=184327</link>
      <description>Preventive detention under COFEPOSA was upheld where the detenu&#039;s own conduct, including retrieval and handing over of concealed contraband and his prior arrangement with another participant, showed independent involvement in abetting smuggling. The release of the other participant did not vitiate the detenu&#039;s detention, because the materials against him were separately assessed and the principle applicable to criminal conviction of an abettor after acquittal of the principal offender was held inapposite. The detaining authority was found to have properly considered the seizure, voluntary statement, concealed transport and prior involvement, and its subjective satisfaction was sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 09 Aug 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=184327</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>