Successive anticipatory bail requires a material change in circumstances; non-cooperation with investigation justified refusal.

A successive anticipatory bail petition was held not maintainable where no material change in circumstances was shown after an earlier refusal, and the accused had not cooperated with the investigation despite summons and notices. The court treated the continuing non-appearance before investigating authorities as a factor against exercising discretion in favour of bail, and the request for anticipatory bail was dismissed without relief.

---

---

Issues: Whether the second anticipatory bail petition was maintainable in the absence of any change of circumstances and in view of the petitioner's non-appearance before the investigating authorities.

Analysis: The petition was considered in the backdrop of the earlier detailed refusal of anticipatory bail and the continuing notice-based investigation under the Customs Act. The Court noted that no fresh circumstance had been shown to justify a second round of anticipatory bail. It also took note of the department's stand that the petitioner had not been joining the proceedings despite summons and notices, which weighed against exercise of discretion in his favour.

Conclusion: The second anticipatory bail petition was not entertained and was dismissed.

Final Conclusion: The proceeding ended against the petitioner, with no relief granted on the request for anticipatory bail.

Ratio Decidendi: A successive anticipatory bail application is not maintainable in the absence of a material change of circumstances, especially where the accused has failed to cooperate with the investigation.

---