<?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>2023 (6) TMI 1315 - DELHI HIGH COURT </title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=310080</link>
    <description>After a competent court has passed a remand order, any challenge to custody must be pursued before the court with jurisdiction over that remand, and interim release cannot be granted in collateral proceedings before another court. The alleged non-service of summons in the second ECIR could not be conclusively determined on the material then available, and the alleged failure to disclose the later FIR and ECIR was treated as relevant only to a challenge to the remand order, not as a basis for interim relief in these applications. The applications for release from custody were therefore rejected, while the connected writ petitions were left to proceed separately.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 16 Jun 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 06 Oct 2023 08:20:02 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=728249" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (6) TMI 1315 - DELHI HIGH COURT </title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=310080</link>
      <description>After a competent court has passed a remand order, any challenge to custody must be pursued before the court with jurisdiction over that remand, and interim release cannot be granted in collateral proceedings before another court. The alleged non-service of summons in the second ECIR could not be conclusively determined on the material then available, and the alleged failure to disclose the later FIR and ECIR was treated as relevant only to a challenge to the remand order, not as a basis for interim relief in these applications. The applications for release from custody were therefore rejected, while the connected writ petitions were left to proceed separately.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 16 Jun 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=310080</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>