Successive bail applications require fresh grounds or changed circumstances; prolonged custody alone does not justify release.

Successive bail applications are maintainable only on fresh grounds or a material change in circumstances that directly affects the earlier refusal. The Court found no subsequent development or new material to justify reconsideration, as the earlier bail rejections had already addressed the extradition background, alleged flight risk, prosecution case, and prolonged custody. Reliance on Section 436A of the Code of Criminal Procedure was also unavailable because the Supreme Court had already declined that basis and the allegations included serious offences carrying severe punishment. Continued incarceration by itself was therefore insufficient, and bail was refused.

---

---

Issues: Whether the petitioner was entitled to bail in a successive bail application in the absence of any fresh grounds or substantial change in circumstances, and whether Section 436A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 could support release.

Analysis: Successive bail applications are maintainable only when supported by a significant change in fact situation or new material having a direct bearing on the earlier refusal. Earlier orders rejecting bail had already examined the petitioner's challenge, including the extradition background, the prosecution case, the allegation of flight risk, and the plea founded on prolonged custody. The Court found no subsequent development or fresh material that could justify a different view. The reliance on Section 436A was also unavailable, as the Supreme Court had already declined that basis and the allegations included offences attracting severe punishment, including Section 467 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. In these circumstances, continued incarceration by itself did not warrant grant of bail.

Conclusion: The petitioner was not entitled to bail, and the successive bail application failed for want of new or fresh grounds and substantial change in circumstances.

Ratio Decidendi: A successive bail application can succeed only on the basis of a material change in circumstances or fresh grounds that materially affect the earlier refusal; mere passage of time or long custody is insufficient where the earlier reasons continue to operate.

---