https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=793314 Article 21 liberty was treated as surviving the bail restraint in Section 43D(5) of the UAPA, with prolonged incarceration relevant but not automatically decisive; the proper approach is contextual, considering allegations, role, prima facie material, trial stage, delay, and competing security concerns. The order also states that perceived divergence between coordinate Benches on the application of K.A. Najeeb required reference to a Bench of appropriate strength to maintain judicial discipline and consistency. Pending authoritative resolution, interim bail was granted subject to conditions, without expressing any view on the merits. en-us Fri, 22 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 12 Jun 2026 12:34:30 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=793314 Article 21 liberty was treated as surviving the bail restraint in Section 43D(5) of the UAPA, with prolonged incarceration relevant but not automatically decisive; the proper approach is contextual, considering allegations, role, prima facie material, trial stage, delay, and competing security concerns. The order also states that perceived divergence between coordinate Benches on the application of K.A. Najeeb required reference to a Bench of appropriate strength to maintain judicial discipline and consistency. Pending authoritative resolution, interim bail was granted subject to conditions, without expressing any view on the merits. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 22 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=793314