https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=312900 Detention beyond the prescribed investigative period under the NDPS Act could continue only where the statutory requirements for extension were satisfied, including progress of investigation, compelling reasons for further custody, and notice to the accused. On the facts, the maximum period had expired, notice was not shown to have been served, and the extension was sought only because the chemical examiner's report had not been received; the extension request and order were treated as routine and mechanical non-compliance with statutory safeguards. Bail was therefore granted. en-us Tue, 04 Feb 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 13 Mar 2024 17:53:54 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=312900 Detention beyond the prescribed investigative period under the NDPS Act could continue only where the statutory requirements for extension were satisfied, including progress of investigation, compelling reasons for further custody, and notice to the accused. On the facts, the maximum period had expired, notice was not shown to have been served, and the extension was sought only because the chemical examiner's report had not been received; the extension request and order were treated as routine and mechanical non-compliance with statutory safeguards. Bail was therefore granted. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 04 Feb 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=312900