https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=372780 Where the statutory period for investigation under Section 212(3) of the Companies Act had already expired, an arrest made before any later ex post facto extension was held to lack legal sanction and jurisdiction. The applicants had cooperated and no flight risk was shown, supporting the finding that the detention was illegal. A Magistrate's remand order could not cure an arrest that was void at its inception, and habeas corpus scrutiny remained available to test the legality of the detention. The detention was held to offend Article 21, and interim bail was granted pending the writ petitions. en-us Thu, 20 Dec 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 03 Jun 2019 11:41:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=372780 Where the statutory period for investigation under Section 212(3) of the Companies Act had already expired, an arrest made before any later ex post facto extension was held to lack legal sanction and jurisdiction. The applicants had cooperated and no flight risk was shown, supporting the finding that the detention was illegal. A Magistrate's remand order could not cure an arrest that was void at its inception, and habeas corpus scrutiny remained available to test the legality of the detention. The detention was held to offend Article 21, and interim bail was granted pending the writ petitions. Case-Laws Companies Law Thu, 20 Dec 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=372780