<?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 (3) TMI 1710 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469209</link>
    <description>Stringent bail scrutiny under Section 21(4) of MCOCA required the Court to be satisfied that the accused was not guilty and was not likely to reoffend while on bail. In the facts noted, alleged membership of an organised crime syndicate, the seriousness of the underlying offences, the applicant&#039;s criminal antecedents, and breach of bail conditions outweighed the period already spent in custody. Regular bail was therefore refused and the application was dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 10 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 10 Jun 2026 15:56:57 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=906402" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (3) TMI 1710 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469209</link>
      <description>Stringent bail scrutiny under Section 21(4) of MCOCA required the Court to be satisfied that the accused was not guilty and was not likely to reoffend while on bail. In the facts noted, alleged membership of an organised crime syndicate, the seriousness of the underlying offences, the applicant&#039;s criminal antecedents, and breach of bail conditions outweighed the period already spent in custody. Regular bail was therefore refused and the application was dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 10 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469209</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>