Search Results for "investigation detention period"

630 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 630 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Allows Default Bail in POCSO Case Due to Non-Completion of Investigation Within 60 Days. Petitioner Enlarged on Bail Under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. as Charge Sheet Not Filed Within Statutory Period.

The petitioner, Moulali, was arrested on 03.12.2024 in connection with offences punishable under Sections 376(2)(n), 506 of IPC and Sections 4, 6, 8, ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Allows Default Bail in POCSO Case Due to Non-Completion of Investigation Within 60 Days. Petitioner Entitled to Default Bail Under Section 167(2) CrPC as Charge Sheet Filed After Expiry of 60 Days from First Remand.

The petitioner, Moulali, was arrested on 01.12.2024 in connection with offences punishable under Sections 376(2)(n), 506 of IPC and Sections 4, 6, 8, ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Grants Default Bail to Activist in UAPA Case for Failure to File Charge Sheet Within 90 Days. The court held that the right to default bail under Section 167(2) CrPC is indefeasible and the period of house arrest cannot be excluded from the computation of the 90-day period.

The appellant, Gautam P. Navlakha, a 69-year-old scholar, writer, and civil rights activist, was arrested on 28/10/2018 in connection with FIR No. 4 o...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Quashes Detention Order Under COFEPOSA Due to Non-Application of Mind and Unexplained Delay. Failure to Consider Retraction of Statement and Delay of Over 11 Months in Passing Order Vitiate Subjective Satisfaction Under Section 3(1)(i) of COFEPOSA Act, 1976.

The petitioner, Gaurav Kanak Jain, challenged a detention order dated 21st November 2016 passed under Section 3(1)(i) of the Conservation of Foreign E...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Quashes Preventive Detention Order in COFEPOSA Case for Non-Application of Mind. Detenu in judicial custody; detaining authority failed to consider less restrictive alternatives under ordinary law, rendering detention order invalid.

The petitioner, Mahesh V. Amesur, cousin of Jeetu Shankarlal Chhapru, filed a writ of habeas corpus under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Quashes Detention Order Under COFEPOSA for Non-Application of Mind and Non-Supply of Vital Documents. Detenu's Right to Make Effective Representation Under Article 22(5) of Constitution Violated as Statements of Co-Accused Not Furnished.

The petitioner, brother-in-law of the detenu Burhan Fakhruddin Khatumdi, challenged a detention order dated 27.3.2015 passed by the Principal Secretar...