<?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>2022 (3) TMI 1429 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=304542</link>
    <description>The Court held that the Petitioner was not entitled to default bail under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. despite chargesheet filing, as the right to default bail does not arise once chargesheet is filed, irrespective of cognizance. Citing relevant case law, the Court dismissed the petition for default bail, emphasizing that filing chargesheet within prescribed period extinguishes the right to default bail.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 15 Mar 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 02 Oct 2022 19:01:18 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=692406" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (3) TMI 1429 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=304542</link>
      <description>The Court held that the Petitioner was not entitled to default bail under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. despite chargesheet filing, as the right to default bail does not arise once chargesheet is filed, irrespective of cognizance. Citing relevant case law, the Court dismissed the petition for default bail, emphasizing that filing chargesheet within prescribed period extinguishes the right to default bail.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 15 Mar 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=304542</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>