<?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 (4) TMI 1222 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197767</link>
    <description>MCOCA&#039;s definition of continuing unlawful activity was treated as requiring more than one prior charge-sheet before a competent court within ten years, together with cognizance of the offence, and cognizance was held to be of the offence rather than the offender. On that basis, earlier Parbhani and Jalna charge-sheets supplied the statutory foundation for invoking MCOCA in relation to the later incident, and organized crime was read broadly to cover violence or unlawful means for undue economic or other advantage, not pecuniary gain alone. For bail, the court required a separate nexus assessment under the special bail provision: one appellant was denied bail, while the others were remitted for fresh consideration on merits.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 15 Apr 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 13 Jun 2026 13:08:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=504512" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (4) TMI 1222 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197767</link>
      <description>MCOCA&#039;s definition of continuing unlawful activity was treated as requiring more than one prior charge-sheet before a competent court within ten years, together with cognizance of the offence, and cognizance was held to be of the offence rather than the offender. On that basis, earlier Parbhani and Jalna charge-sheets supplied the statutory foundation for invoking MCOCA in relation to the later incident, and organized crime was read broadly to cover violence or unlawful means for undue economic or other advantage, not pecuniary gain alone. For bail, the court required a separate nexus assessment under the special bail provision: one appellant was denied bail, while the others were remitted for fresh consideration on merits.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 15 Apr 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197767</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>