<?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>2016 (11) TMI 1760 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457312</link>
    <description>The jurisdiction to consider regular bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is concurrent in the High Court and the Court of Session, but established practice requires the accused to approach the Court of Session first. Applying that practice, the High Court declined to examine the merits of the bail plea at this stage and left the petitioner free to raise all contentions before the Court of Session.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 30 Nov 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 16 Sep 2024 20:01:10 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=768425" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (11) TMI 1760 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457312</link>
      <description>The jurisdiction to consider regular bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is concurrent in the High Court and the Court of Session, but established practice requires the accused to approach the Court of Session first. Applying that practice, the High Court declined to examine the merits of the bail plea at this stage and left the petitioner free to raise all contentions before the Court of Session.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 30 Nov 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457312</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>