https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=462575 In bail matters, absence of any fresh change in circumstances can justify refusal where the accused remains linked to the alleged criminal activity. Appellant No. 1 was denied bail because the earlier rejection had already noted his alleged contact with the Naxalite commander and role in supplying materials, and no new circumstance was shown to warrant reconsideration. Bail was also refused on the ground that his case was not shown to be comparable to the co-accused who had obtained Supreme Court bail. Appellant No. 2 was treated as similarly placed to that co-accused, so the order was modified and bail was granted on stated conditions. en-us Fri, 16 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 02 Jul 2025 19:03:43 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=462575 In bail matters, absence of any fresh change in circumstances can justify refusal where the accused remains linked to the alleged criminal activity. Appellant No. 1 was denied bail because the earlier rejection had already noted his alleged contact with the Naxalite commander and role in supplying materials, and no new circumstance was shown to warrant reconsideration. Bail was also refused on the ground that his case was not shown to be comparable to the co-accused who had obtained Supreme Court bail. Appellant No. 2 was treated as similarly placed to that co-accused, so the order was modified and bail was granted on stated conditions. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 16 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=462575