<?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 (9) TMI 1067 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=398948</link>
    <description>In sentencing under the NDPS Act, mitigating factors such as absence of prior criminal antecedents, the accused being the sole earning member of the family, and substantial custody already undergone may justify reduction of the substantive prison term. Applying that approach, the Delhi HC maintained the conviction under Section 21(c) but reduced the sentence to the period already undergone, while keeping the fine intact and modifying the default sentence.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 25 Sep 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 28 Sep 2020 11:46:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=623488" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (9) TMI 1067 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=398948</link>
      <description>In sentencing under the NDPS Act, mitigating factors such as absence of prior criminal antecedents, the accused being the sole earning member of the family, and substantial custody already undergone may justify reduction of the substantive prison term. Applying that approach, the Delhi HC maintained the conviction under Section 21(c) but reduced the sentence to the period already undergone, while keeping the fine intact and modifying the default sentence.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 25 Sep 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=398948</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>