<?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>2020 (2) TMI 1710 - PATNA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=310384</link>
    <description>Bail in an Arms Act case was declined after the Court assessed the allegations, the materials on record, and the rival submissions. The prosecution relied on recovery of prohibited arms and witness support for its version, while the petitioner pointed to custody since 22.05.2019. On that assessment, the Court held that the case did not justify release on bail at that stage, and bail was refused.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 17 Feb 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 21 Oct 2023 07:00:05 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=729873" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (2) TMI 1710 - PATNA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=310384</link>
      <description>Bail in an Arms Act case was declined after the Court assessed the allegations, the materials on record, and the rival submissions. The prosecution relied on recovery of prohibited arms and witness support for its version, while the petitioner pointed to custody since 22.05.2019. On that assessment, the Court held that the case did not justify release on bail at that stage, and bail was refused.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 17 Feb 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=310384</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>