<?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>2003 (4) TMI 605 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303275</link>
    <description>Section 40 of the Gujarat Municipalities Act, 1963 was construed purposively to determine whether &quot;detained in prison during trial&quot; is limited to post-charge custody. The majority read the phrase in context and with the statutory object of preserving public confidence in municipal office, holding that it covers detention during the criminal process leading up to and in aid of trial, but not preventive detention or police custody. A narrow meaning confined to the stage after framing of charge was rejected as inconsistent with the scheme of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The dissent would have limited the phrase to post-charge proceedings. On that construction, the suspension was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 14 Apr 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 12 Jul 2022 14:48:23 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=684786" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (4) TMI 605 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303275</link>
      <description>Section 40 of the Gujarat Municipalities Act, 1963 was construed purposively to determine whether &quot;detained in prison during trial&quot; is limited to post-charge custody. The majority read the phrase in context and with the statutory object of preserving public confidence in municipal office, holding that it covers detention during the criminal process leading up to and in aid of trial, but not preventive detention or police custody. A narrow meaning confined to the stage after framing of charge was rejected as inconsistent with the scheme of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The dissent would have limited the phrase to post-charge proceedings. On that construction, the suspension was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 14 Apr 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303275</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>