<?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>2014 (4) TMI 1276 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=297959</link>
    <description>The court held that anticipatory bail under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. is not applicable for bailable offences, even if a non-bailable warrant is issued. The applicant was directed to seek cancellation of the warrant from the Magistrate under Section 70(2) of Cr.P.C. The application for anticipatory bail was dismissed, affirming the Sessions Court&#039;s decision.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 30 Apr 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 02 Oct 2021 10:00:41 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=657472" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (4) TMI 1276 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=297959</link>
      <description>The court held that anticipatory bail under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. is not applicable for bailable offences, even if a non-bailable warrant is issued. The applicant was directed to seek cancellation of the warrant from the Magistrate under Section 70(2) of Cr.P.C. The application for anticipatory bail was dismissed, affirming the Sessions Court&#039;s decision.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 30 Apr 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=297959</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>