Inspector of Police and others Vs.
N.M.T Joy Immaculate reported as 2004(5) SCC 729 for the said
proposition and has also relied ... Supreme Court in N.M.T Joy
Immaculate (supra), it has been specifically observed that the police
officers are fully authorized to require the personal
Inspector of Police and others v. N.M.T. Joy Immaculate'
2004(3) RCR (Criminal) 322 has dealt with the same based on
various
Inspector of Police
and others Vs. N.M.T. Joy Immaculate, 2004 (3) RCR (Crl.) 322, wherein
it was held that interlocutory order
Supreme Court in the case of State v. N.M.T. Joy
Immaculate , AIR 2004 Supreme Court 2282 has taken
the view that an order
Supreme Court in the case of State v. N.M.T. Joy
Immaculate , AIR 2004 Supreme Court 2282 has taken
the view that an order
represented
by Inspector of Police and others Vs. N.M.T Joy Immaculate 2004(3)
R.C.R (Criminal) 322, held as under ... Metropolitan Magistrate granting police custody of the accused
Joy Immaculate for one day."
13. The said question also came up before this Court
CRWP-4083-2022 ::4::
N.M.T. Joy Immaculate, 2004(3) RCR (Criminal) 322. Further, the right
claimed under Section
Supreme Court in Inspector of Police and others vs.
NMT Joy Immaculate, 2004 Crl. Law Journal 2515 Addl. Sessions Judge,
Chandigarh to contend that
