https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=306351 The court dismissed the appeal, ruling that the house arrest of the appellant was not considered to be under Section 167 of the CrPC and therefore could not be treated as such. Although the house arrest did involve a deprivation of liberty, it was not within the scope of Section 167 in this particular case. The court highlighted that house arrest could be ordered under Section 167 in suitable circumstances, taking into account factors such as age, health, and the nature of the offense. en-us Wed, 12 May 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 23 Jan 2023 18:51:08 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=306351 The court dismissed the appeal, ruling that the house arrest of the appellant was not considered to be under Section 167 of the CrPC and therefore could not be treated as such. Although the house arrest did involve a deprivation of liberty, it was not within the scope of Section 167 in this particular case. The court highlighted that house arrest could be ordered under Section 167 in suitable circumstances, taking into account factors such as age, health, and the nature of the offense. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 12 May 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=306351