<?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 (8) TMI 1047 - Supreme Court (LB)</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757343</link>
    <description>Preventive detention based on relied-upon WhatsApp chats and allied electronic material failed where that material was not supplied to the detenue, because effective representation under Article 22(5) requires access to all relied-upon records. The document also states that a later Division Bench could not depart from an earlier coordinate Bench decision on materially identical detention grounds and evidence merely by treating other materials as distinguishing factors; if it doubted the earlier view, judicial discipline required reference to a larger Bench. On that basis, the detention order was vitiated for non-supply of relied-upon electronic material and the appeal succeeded.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 20 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 22 Aug 2024 15:10:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=765031" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (8) TMI 1047 - Supreme Court (LB)</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757343</link>
      <description>Preventive detention based on relied-upon WhatsApp chats and allied electronic material failed where that material was not supplied to the detenue, because effective representation under Article 22(5) requires access to all relied-upon records. The document also states that a later Division Bench could not depart from an earlier coordinate Bench decision on materially identical detention grounds and evidence merely by treating other materials as distinguishing factors; if it doubted the earlier view, judicial discipline required reference to a larger Bench. On that basis, the detention order was vitiated for non-supply of relied-upon electronic material and the appeal succeeded.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 20 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757343</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>