<?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 (10) TMI 1382 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313480</link>
    <description>Anticipatory bail was refused where petitioners were accused of making false disclosures in municipal election nomination papers, giving rise to proceedings for violation of the Bihar Nagar Palika Act, 2007 and an FIR under penal provisions. The Court found no justification for pre-arrest protection on the facts presented and rejected the contention that custodial interrogation was unnecessary.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 09 Oct 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 16 Apr 2024 21:19:39 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=750213" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (10) TMI 1382 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313480</link>
      <description>Anticipatory bail was refused where petitioners were accused of making false disclosures in municipal election nomination papers, giving rise to proceedings for violation of the Bihar Nagar Palika Act, 2007 and an FIR under penal provisions. The Court found no justification for pre-arrest protection on the facts presented and rejected the contention that custodial interrogation was unnecessary.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 09 Oct 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313480</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>