https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=309899 Habeas corpus was unavailable against custody arising from a facially valid judicial remand order because the detention followed a competent court's order passed after hearing both sides and applying mind to the record; absent patent lack of jurisdiction, absolute illegality, or a wholly mechanical exercise, the custody remained judicial custody. Arrest and investigation under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act were also not invalid for want of Chapter XII compliance, because the special statute contains its own arrest and investigation framework and the general criminal procedure applies only where consistent with that law. The objections to custody, arrest, remand, and investigation therefore failed. en-us Fri, 07 Jul 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 26 Sep 2023 21:27:02 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=309899 Habeas corpus was unavailable against custody arising from a facially valid judicial remand order because the detention followed a competent court's order passed after hearing both sides and applying mind to the record; absent patent lack of jurisdiction, absolute illegality, or a wholly mechanical exercise, the custody remained judicial custody. Arrest and investigation under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act were also not invalid for want of Chapter XII compliance, because the special statute contains its own arrest and investigation framework and the general criminal procedure applies only where consistent with that law. The objections to custody, arrest, remand, and investigation therefore failed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 07 Jul 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=309899