<?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 (5) TMI 760 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469553</link>
    <description>Bail was granted under Section 439 CrPC in an excise offence case because the investigation had concluded and the charge-sheet had already been filed, making further custodial interrogation unnecessary. The Court also noted that the alleged offence carried a maximum punishment of three years, that trial was unlikely to conclude early, and that the record did not show any likelihood of the petitioner fleeing from justice. On these considerations, continued custody was not justified and bail was allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 13 May 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 22 Jun 2026 15:57:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=908102" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (5) TMI 760 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469553</link>
      <description>Bail was granted under Section 439 CrPC in an excise offence case because the investigation had concluded and the charge-sheet had already been filed, making further custodial interrogation unnecessary. The Court also noted that the alleged offence carried a maximum punishment of three years, that trial was unlikely to conclude early, and that the record did not show any likelihood of the petitioner fleeing from justice. On these considerations, continued custody was not justified and bail was allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 13 May 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469553</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>