<?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>2019 (6) TMI 1759 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=470734</link>
    <description>Article 32 may be invoked to protect personal liberty where deprivation is glaring, notwithstanding a remand order and the ordinary expectation that the person first approach the High Court. The notes state that continued custody for approximately 13 to 14 days was excessive in the circumstances and that the power to do complete justice could support moulding relief. Immediate release on bail was directed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 11 Jun 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 06 Aug 2026 13:11:59 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=915740" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (6) TMI 1759 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=470734</link>
      <description>Article 32 may be invoked to protect personal liberty where deprivation is glaring, notwithstanding a remand order and the ordinary expectation that the person first approach the High Court. The notes state that continued custody for approximately 13 to 14 days was excessive in the circumstances and that the power to do complete justice could support moulding relief. Immediate release on bail was directed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 11 Jun 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=470734</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>