Successive bail application requires fresh grounds; repeated request on the same material was dismissed.

A successive regular bail application is not entertainable on the same material unless supported by fresh grounds or changed circumstances. The petitioner's request for bail in a money-laundering case had already been rejected by a coordinate Bench, the later challenge before the Apex Court had been withdrawn, and a further attempt for the same relief was also rejected. As no new circumstance was shown and the plea merely repeated the earlier request with reliance on custody period, the Court declined to entertain the application and dismissed it.

---

---

Issues: Whether a successive application for regular bail could be entertained in the absence of any fresh ground.

Analysis: The petitioner sought regular bail for an offence under Section 4 of the Prevention of Money-laundering Act, 2002. The prayer had earlier been rejected by a coordinate Bench, and the later challenge before the Apex Court had been permitted to be withdrawn. A subsequent attempt for the same relief was also rejected. In the present application, no new circumstance or fresh ground was shown, the plea being only a repetition of the earlier request and the period of custody.

Conclusion: The Court held that there was no reason to entertain the repeated bail application and dismissed it.

Ratio Decidendi: A successive bail application is not entertainable on the same material unless supported by fresh grounds or changed circumstances.

---