https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=310224 The court rejected the interim application to intervene in the matter but acknowledged the applicant's apprehension of arrest in a cognizable offense. The trial Court's rejection was based on the lack of specific crime or complaint in the application. The court granted the applicant 72 hours notice before arrest, emphasizing that anticipatory bail would not be provided but recognizing the applicant's concerns. If the respondent decided to arrest the applicant based on specific reports, a 72-hour notice was mandated. en-us Wed, 24 Nov 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 13 Oct 2023 09:02:52 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=310224 The court rejected the interim application to intervene in the matter but acknowledged the applicant's apprehension of arrest in a cognizable offense. The trial Court's rejection was based on the lack of specific crime or complaint in the application. The court granted the applicant 72 hours notice before arrest, emphasizing that anticipatory bail would not be provided but recognizing the applicant's concerns. If the respondent decided to arrest the applicant based on specific reports, a 72-hour notice was mandated. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 24 Nov 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=310224