https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185218 The Court held that handcuffing of an accused must conform to settled legal principles and that the Union Government should frame and circulate uniform rules or guidelines to police authorities and administrations. It also held that the commencement of section 30 of the Advocates Act could not be compelled by mandamus because the choice to bring it into force lay within the Central Government's discretion. However, that discretion had to be exercised fairly and reasonably, so the Government was directed to consider the matter within a reasonable time, rather than being ordered to enforce the provision. en-us Thu, 04 Aug 1988 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 23 Jun 2017 17:14:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185218 The Court held that handcuffing of an accused must conform to settled legal principles and that the Union Government should frame and circulate uniform rules or guidelines to police authorities and administrations. It also held that the commencement of section 30 of the Advocates Act could not be compelled by mandamus because the choice to bring it into force lay within the Central Government's discretion. However, that discretion had to be exercised fairly and reasonably, so the Government was directed to consider the matter within a reasonable time, rather than being ordered to enforce the provision. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 04 Aug 1988 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185218