<?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>2020 (3) TMI 730 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393586</link>
    <description>Bail under Section 439 CrPC was considered in an NDPS prosecution where the record showed prima facie material that the accused had booked a parcel containing concealed psychotropic tablets and that additional psychotropic substances were recovered from the residence. The Court treated objections about sampling, identification and procedural compliance as disputed factual issues for trial, not grounds for release at the pre-trial stage. It also noted involvement in another narcotics case. On that basis, bail was rejected because the prima facie case of trafficking and possession outweighed the asserted inconsistencies.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 11 Feb 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 20 Mar 2020 10:18:48 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=607392" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (3) TMI 730 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393586</link>
      <description>Bail under Section 439 CrPC was considered in an NDPS prosecution where the record showed prima facie material that the accused had booked a parcel containing concealed psychotropic tablets and that additional psychotropic substances were recovered from the residence. The Court treated objections about sampling, identification and procedural compliance as disputed factual issues for trial, not grounds for release at the pre-trial stage. It also noted involvement in another narcotics case. On that basis, bail was rejected because the prima facie case of trafficking and possession outweighed the asserted inconsistencies.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 11 Feb 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393586</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>