<?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 (10) TMI 531 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=399557</link>
    <description>Regular bail under Section 439 CrPC was refused in a case alleging cheating and criminal breach of trust, because the court found the prosecution material sufficient to justify continued detention at this stage. The alleged business tie-ups with foreign entities were unsupported by any formal agreement, the company showed no tangible business activity, and the defence that the applicant lacked responsibility for financial dealings did not displace his role as a director. The delay in lodging the FIR was treated as adequately explained, and the need for effective investigation, including custodial interrogation, weighed against release on bail.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 09 Oct 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 14 Oct 2020 10:54:35 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=625044" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (10) TMI 531 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=399557</link>
      <description>Regular bail under Section 439 CrPC was refused in a case alleging cheating and criminal breach of trust, because the court found the prosecution material sufficient to justify continued detention at this stage. The alleged business tie-ups with foreign entities were unsupported by any formal agreement, the company showed no tangible business activity, and the defence that the applicant lacked responsibility for financial dealings did not displace his role as a director. The delay in lodging the FIR was treated as adequately explained, and the need for effective investigation, including custodial interrogation, weighed against release on bail.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 09 Oct 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=399557</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>