<?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>The High Court of Madhya Pradesh denied the bail application under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. in a case involving alleged offenses under Section 420, 406, and 409/34 of the IPC. The Court found discrepancies in the applicant&#039;s claims, lack of concrete evidence supporting business transactions, and undeniable involvement in financial matters. Emphasizing the substantial amount involved, dishonor of cheques, and the need for further investigation, the Court rejected the bail application, highlighting the importance of custodial interrogation and the applicant&#039;s custody not being a sufficient ground for 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>The High Court of Madhya Pradesh denied the bail application under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. in a case involving alleged offenses under Section 420, 406, and 409/34 of the IPC. The Court found discrepancies in the applicant&#039;s claims, lack of concrete evidence supporting business transactions, and undeniable involvement in financial matters. Emphasizing the substantial amount involved, dishonor of cheques, and the need for further investigation, the Court rejected the bail application, highlighting the importance of custodial interrogation and the applicant&#039;s custody not being a sufficient ground for 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>