<?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>2021 (10) TMI 1479 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464138</link>
    <description>Anticipatory bail may be interfered with where the accused has evaded arrest for a substantial period, joined investigation only after interim protection, and the record does not justify discretionary relief. The Court held that prolonged absconding, the seriousness of the allegations, and the material on record made the grant of anticipatory bail unsustainable, so the order was set aside and the accused was directed to surrender, while leaving open the right to seek regular bail in accordance with law. Parity with a co-accused was also rejected because the applicant&#039;s role and conduct were materially distinct, and common family allegations did not by themselves warrant equal relief.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 04 Oct 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Oct 2025 11:01:10 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=856910" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (10) TMI 1479 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464138</link>
      <description>Anticipatory bail may be interfered with where the accused has evaded arrest for a substantial period, joined investigation only after interim protection, and the record does not justify discretionary relief. The Court held that prolonged absconding, the seriousness of the allegations, and the material on record made the grant of anticipatory bail unsustainable, so the order was set aside and the accused was directed to surrender, while leaving open the right to seek regular bail in accordance with law. Parity with a co-accused was also rejected because the applicant&#039;s role and conduct were materially distinct, and common family allegations did not by themselves warrant equal relief.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 04 Oct 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464138</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>