<?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>2014 (4) TMI 1305 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=312901</link>
    <description>Default bail under Section 167(2) of the CrPC crystallises once the final report period expires, unless the prosecution secures a valid extension in compliance with Section 36-A of the NDPS Act. Here, the extension was sought only because the chemical examiner&#039;s report had not been received, but the mandatory requirements of a Public Prosecutor&#039;s report showing investigation progress and compelling reasons for further detention, together with notice to the accused, were not shown to have been met. The extension order was therefore routine and mechanical, and it did not defeat the petitioner&#039;s right to default bail.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 07 Apr 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 13 Mar 2024 17:53:54 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=746824" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (4) TMI 1305 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=312901</link>
      <description>Default bail under Section 167(2) of the CrPC crystallises once the final report period expires, unless the prosecution secures a valid extension in compliance with Section 36-A of the NDPS Act. Here, the extension was sought only because the chemical examiner&#039;s report had not been received, but the mandatory requirements of a Public Prosecutor&#039;s report showing investigation progress and compelling reasons for further detention, together with notice to the accused, were not shown to have been met. The extension order was therefore routine and mechanical, and it did not defeat the petitioner&#039;s right to default bail.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 07 Apr 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=312901</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>