Bail under the Companies Act refused for lack of changed circumstances and unmet statutory conditions in a serious fraud case.

Bail under Section 212(6)(ii) of the Companies Act, 2013 was refused where the accused filed a second application without showing any change of circumstances. The HC noted that the earlier order had already considered completion of investigation, filing of the final report, and the claim that the transactions predated Section 447, yet the statutory bail conditions were still not met. It accepted the prosecution's case that the allegations disclosed a serious economic offence involving major fraudulent activity, and found no fresh basis to depart from the prior view. Bail was therefore declined.

---

---

Issues: Whether the petitioner was entitled to bail in the absence of any change of circumstances, having regard to the conditions under Section 212(6)(ii) of the Companies Act, 2013 and the allegations of offences under Section 447 of the Companies Act, 2013.

Analysis: The petitioner sought bail in a second application contending that investigation was complete, the final report had been filed, and the alleged transactions were prior to the enforcement of Section 447 of the Companies Act, 2013. The Court noted that the earlier order had already considered these aspects and had found that the petitioner had not satisfied the statutory conditions for grant of bail. It further found no new circumstances warranting a different view, and accepted the prosecution's case that the allegations disclosed a serious economic offence involving a major fraudulent activity.

Conclusion: Bail was declined, as no change of circumstances was shown and the statutory bail conditions were not satisfied.

---