<?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>1996 (4) TMI 515 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277777</link>
    <description>Criminal conspiracy under Section 120-A requires agreement or concert to pursue an unlawful object, and intent may be inferred from surrounding circumstances; in a chain conspiracy, each participant need not know every detail if the common unlawful purpose is shown. At the charge stage, the court only asks whether the prosecution material gives rise to a ground for presuming commission of the offence, without weighing evidence. The expiry of TADA did not abate pending investigations, inquiries or trials because the saving provision preserved them. Applying these principles, charges against two accused were set aside, charges against two others were sustained, and cancellation of bail was refused on the special facts.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 12 Apr 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 22 Dec 2018 13:46:32 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=548600" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1996 (4) TMI 515 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277777</link>
      <description>Criminal conspiracy under Section 120-A requires agreement or concert to pursue an unlawful object, and intent may be inferred from surrounding circumstances; in a chain conspiracy, each participant need not know every detail if the common unlawful purpose is shown. At the charge stage, the court only asks whether the prosecution material gives rise to a ground for presuming commission of the offence, without weighing evidence. The expiry of TADA did not abate pending investigations, inquiries or trials because the saving provision preserved them. Applying these principles, charges against two accused were set aside, charges against two others were sustained, and cancellation of bail was refused on the special facts.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 12 Apr 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277777</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>