<?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>2021 (7) TMI 597 - CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=409755</link>
    <description>Interim bail under the COVID-19 decongestion criteria was refused where the petitioners faced allegations of foreign-origin gold smuggling and an ongoing Customs Act investigation. The Court treated the matter as a serious economic offence, noted prima facie involvement and earlier customs proceedings suggesting habitual conduct, and accepted that custodial remand was necessary for effective investigation. It also relied on the risk of absconding and possible influence on witnesses. On that basis, the petitioners were held not entitled to interim bail under the High Powered Committee guidelines, and interference with the Magistrate&#039;s refusal was declined.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 07 Jul 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 25 Oct 2021 11:06:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=649743" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (7) TMI 597 - CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=409755</link>
      <description>Interim bail under the COVID-19 decongestion criteria was refused where the petitioners faced allegations of foreign-origin gold smuggling and an ongoing Customs Act investigation. The Court treated the matter as a serious economic offence, noted prima facie involvement and earlier customs proceedings suggesting habitual conduct, and accepted that custodial remand was necessary for effective investigation. It also relied on the risk of absconding and possible influence on witnesses. On that basis, the petitioners were held not entitled to interim bail under the High Powered Committee guidelines, and interference with the Magistrate&#039;s refusal was declined.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 07 Jul 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=409755</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>