https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=364407 Offences under Sections 9 and 9A of the Central Excise Act, 1944, read with Section 20, were treated as non-cognizable and bailable, so anticipatory bail was not the appropriate remedy. The petitioners were directed to appear before the court below and seek regular bail, which was to be considered in light of the controlling interpretation relied upon. The proceeding was thus disposed of on the footing that the statutory scheme governs the bail route for such offences. en-us Tue, 24 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Sun, 29 Jul 2018 12:26:25 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=364407 Offences under Sections 9 and 9A of the Central Excise Act, 1944, read with Section 20, were treated as non-cognizable and bailable, so anticipatory bail was not the appropriate remedy. The petitioners were directed to appear before the court below and seek regular bail, which was to be considered in light of the controlling interpretation relied upon. The proceeding was thus disposed of on the footing that the statutory scheme governs the bail route for such offences. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 24 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=364407