https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299812 An order granting or refusing bail is interlocutory because it lacks finality and may be revisited, so revisional jurisdiction under section 397(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure cannot be exercised against it. Cancellation of bail already granted requires cogent, overwhelming and supervening circumstances showing likely tampering with evidence, interference with justice, absconding, or misuse of liberty. In the absence of any subsequent event, breach of condition, or material showing abuse of bail, cancellation is not sustainable. The revisional order was set aside and the original bail order restored. en-us Tue, 19 Apr 1994 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 30 Dec 2021 14:34:48 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299812 An order granting or refusing bail is interlocutory because it lacks finality and may be revisited, so revisional jurisdiction under section 397(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure cannot be exercised against it. Cancellation of bail already granted requires cogent, overwhelming and supervening circumstances showing likely tampering with evidence, interference with justice, absconding, or misuse of liberty. In the absence of any subsequent event, breach of condition, or material showing abuse of bail, cancellation is not sustainable. The revisional order was set aside and the original bail order restored. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 19 Apr 1994 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299812