<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2019 (1) TMI 1499 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=374334</link>
    <description>A second bail application based on parity and alleged change in circumstances was rejected because the recovery of the alleged bribe money was from the applicant, the record showed his knowledge and participation, and his role was graver than that of the co-accused already on bail. The filing of the charge-sheet was not treated as a fresh circumstance, since it existed when the first bail application was considered. Bail was therefore refused.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 18 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 24 Jun 2019 12:03:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=555741" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (1) TMI 1499 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=374334</link>
      <description>A second bail application based on parity and alleged change in circumstances was rejected because the recovery of the alleged bribe money was from the applicant, the record showed his knowledge and participation, and his role was graver than that of the co-accused already on bail. The filing of the charge-sheet was not treated as a fresh circumstance, since it existed when the first bail application was considered. Bail was therefore refused.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 18 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=374334</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>