Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 24 (0.27 seconds)Section 438 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Section 498A in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre vs State Of Maharashtra And Ors on 2 December, 2010
In Siddharam
Satlingappa Mhetre's case (supra) it was held that it is
imperative for the Courts to carefully and with meticulous
B.A.No. 8399 of 2019
-18-
precision evaluate the facts of the case. The discretion
must be exercised on the basis of the available material
and the facts of the particular case. In cases where the
court is of the considered view that the accused has joined
investigation and he is fully co-operating with the
investigating agency and is not likely to abscond,
custodial interrogation should be avoided. In the instant
case, the petitioner has expressed his willingness to co-
operate with the investigation. He apprehends that he may
be incarcerated, and hence, approaches this Court for an
anticipatory bail.
P. Chidambaram vs Directorate Of Enforcement on 5 September, 2019
18. Chidambaram's case (supra) was concerning offence
punishable under Sections 3 and 4 of the Prevention of
Money-Laundering Act, 2002, and receiving of foreign
investments to the tune of Rs.3.5 crores against approved
inflow of Rs.4.62 crores.
Directorate Of Enforcement Shri Ashok ... vs Ashok Kumar Jain Directorate Of ... on 8 January, 1998
The
Hon'ble Apex Court has relied on an earlier decision of the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in Directorate of Enforcement v.
Ashok Kumar Jain, 1998 KHC 518 : (1998) 2 SCC 105 to hold
that accused in an economic offences is not entitled to
anticipatory bail.