<?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>1951 (6) TMI 25 - HYDERABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=307164</link>
    <description>Bail on the ground of sickness or infirmity remains a matter of judicial discretion under the criminal procedure provision, assessed against the gravity of the accusation, the nature of the evidence, the severity of the punishment, the risk of absconding, the possibility of witness influence, and the nature of the alleged ailment. The Court found that the petitioners&#039; medical conditions could be treated in jail and that no special treatment outside prison was shown to be necessary. It also accepted that the risk of flight and witness interference was real. The psychological burden relied on was held insufficient by itself to justify release, so bail was refused.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 18 Jun 1951 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 23 Mar 2023 16:50:59 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=708492" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1951 (6) TMI 25 - HYDERABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=307164</link>
      <description>Bail on the ground of sickness or infirmity remains a matter of judicial discretion under the criminal procedure provision, assessed against the gravity of the accusation, the nature of the evidence, the severity of the punishment, the risk of absconding, the possibility of witness influence, and the nature of the alleged ailment. The Court found that the petitioners&#039; medical conditions could be treated in jail and that no special treatment outside prison was shown to be necessary. It also accepted that the risk of flight and witness interference was real. The psychological burden relied on was held insufficient by itself to justify release, so bail was refused.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 18 Jun 1951 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=307164</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>