<?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 (1) TMI 1528 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=298445</link>
    <description>Interference with a bail order is warranted only where the court granting bail acts without application of mind or where the reasons recorded are unsupported by the prima facie material on record. In a murder and conspiracy prosecution, the Supreme Court noted that the mere gravity of the accusation and the existence of other criminal cases are not, by themselves, sufficient to deny bail if the High Court has considered the relevant materials and adopted a permissible view of the evidence. As the High Court had examined the FIR, witness statements, and surrounding circumstances, no ex facie error or improper exercise of discretion was shown, and the bail orders were upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 24 Jan 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Dec 2021 18:19:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=660090" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (1) TMI 1528 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=298445</link>
      <description>Interference with a bail order is warranted only where the court granting bail acts without application of mind or where the reasons recorded are unsupported by the prima facie material on record. In a murder and conspiracy prosecution, the Supreme Court noted that the mere gravity of the accusation and the existence of other criminal cases are not, by themselves, sufficient to deny bail if the High Court has considered the relevant materials and adopted a permissible view of the evidence. As the High Court had examined the FIR, witness statements, and surrounding circumstances, no ex facie error or improper exercise of discretion was shown, and the bail orders were upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 24 Jan 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=298445</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>