<?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>2025 (11) TMI 1998 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=468948</link>
    <description>Bail was granted on parity and surrounding circumstances, as the applicant relied on bail already granted to a co-accused, the filing of the charge-sheet, the fact that the case was triable by a Magistrate, time spent in custody, and the explanation for criminal history. The State and the complainant opposed bail but did not dispute the parity plea, and no opinion was expressed on the merits of the prosecution case. On those factors, the applicant was found entitled to bail.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 12 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 26 May 2026 21:06:13 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=903929" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (11) TMI 1998 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=468948</link>
      <description>Bail was granted on parity and surrounding circumstances, as the applicant relied on bail already granted to a co-accused, the filing of the charge-sheet, the fact that the case was triable by a Magistrate, time spent in custody, and the explanation for criminal history. The State and the complainant opposed bail but did not dispute the parity plea, and no opinion was expressed on the merits of the prosecution case. On those factors, the applicant was found entitled to bail.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 12 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=468948</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>