<?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>2019 (7) TMI 1546 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=284885</link>
    <description>At the discharge stage under Section 227 CrPC, the court is confined to seeing whether the charge-sheet material discloses a prima facie case; it must not conduct a mini trial or assess evidentiary weight. If the material creates grave suspicion that is not properly explained, discharge is not justified. Applying that standard, the text notes that the accused&#039;s alleged role, telephonic contacts, membership links and other surrounding circumstances were sufficient to support a prima facie case of conspiracy and offences under the penal law, the Arms Act and the UAPA. The truth of the conspiracy was left for trial, and the challenge to refusal of discharge failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 01 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 05 Aug 2023 11:10:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=597342" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (7) TMI 1546 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=284885</link>
      <description>At the discharge stage under Section 227 CrPC, the court is confined to seeing whether the charge-sheet material discloses a prima facie case; it must not conduct a mini trial or assess evidentiary weight. If the material creates grave suspicion that is not properly explained, discharge is not justified. Applying that standard, the text notes that the accused&#039;s alleged role, telephonic contacts, membership links and other surrounding circumstances were sufficient to support a prima facie case of conspiracy and offences under the penal law, the Arms Act and the UAPA. The truth of the conspiracy was left for trial, and the challenge to refusal of discharge failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 01 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=284885</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>