<?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>2026 (2) TMI 1106 - CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=786958</link>
    <description>A successive bail application can be considered only on a showing of substantial change in circumstances. In this corruption case, the Court found no such change after the earlier rejection on merits and held that the investigation record prima facie supported continued custody. CCTV footage, witness identification and voice-related material indicated the applicant&#039;s alleged role in impersonating a senior GST officer and acting in conspiracy for illegal gratification. The Court also relied on alleged non-cooperation during investigation, including evasion of notices and refusal to give a voice sample. Bail was therefore refused and custody was maintained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 19 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 24 Feb 2026 08:36:33 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=887678" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (2) TMI 1106 - CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=786958</link>
      <description>A successive bail application can be considered only on a showing of substantial change in circumstances. In this corruption case, the Court found no such change after the earlier rejection on merits and held that the investigation record prima facie supported continued custody. CCTV footage, witness identification and voice-related material indicated the applicant&#039;s alleged role in impersonating a senior GST officer and acting in conspiracy for illegal gratification. The Court also relied on alleged non-cooperation during investigation, including evasion of notices and refusal to give a voice sample. Bail was therefore refused and custody was maintained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 19 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=786958</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>