<?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>2000 (1) TMI 1030 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=304044</link>
    <description>The SC disposed of the appeal by directing the trial to commence and conclude expeditiously within the stipulated period. If the trial was not completed within that period, the appellant was to be released on bail, provided the delay was not attributable to the appellant. The order thus linked continued custody to timely trial progress and made bail contingent on the absence of delay caused by the appellant.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 04 Jan 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 03 Sep 2022 15:13:30 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=689710" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (1) TMI 1030 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=304044</link>
      <description>The SC disposed of the appeal by directing the trial to commence and conclude expeditiously within the stipulated period. If the trial was not completed within that period, the appellant was to be released on bail, provided the delay was not attributable to the appellant. The order thus linked continued custody to timely trial progress and made bail contingent on the absence of delay caused by the appellant.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 04 Jan 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=304044</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>