<?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>2024 (5) TMI 1344 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=753291</link>
    <description>Delay in trial is only one factor in bail adjudication and does not create an automatic right to release in serious economic offences. The Court held that the applicant could not obtain regular bail solely because trial had progressed slowly, and that the pre-charge delay was not wholly attributable to the applicant, though his repeated document-related applications contributed to it. On merits, the Court found a prima facie case involving alleged conspiracy, fabricated processes, kickbacks and destruction of electronic evidence, and in the PMLA case the applicant failed the twin statutory conditions. Bail was rejected in both cases, with only limited custodial visitation relief granted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 21 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 29 May 2024 22:40:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=754733" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (5) TMI 1344 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=753291</link>
      <description>Delay in trial is only one factor in bail adjudication and does not create an automatic right to release in serious economic offences. The Court held that the applicant could not obtain regular bail solely because trial had progressed slowly, and that the pre-charge delay was not wholly attributable to the applicant, though his repeated document-related applications contributed to it. On merits, the Court found a prima facie case involving alleged conspiracy, fabricated processes, kickbacks and destruction of electronic evidence, and in the PMLA case the applicant failed the twin statutory conditions. Bail was rejected in both cases, with only limited custodial visitation relief granted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Money Laundering</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 21 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=753291</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>