<?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 (1) TMI 1639 - SC Order</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469345</link>
    <description>Bail on parity was considered appropriate where the appellant&#039;s allegations were substantially similar to those against the co-accused, with only a marginally higher allegation concerning receipt and use of proceeds of crime. That aspect was left for trial, and completed investigation with filing of charge-sheet weighed against continued incarceration. On those facts, further custody was not justified and release on bail was warranted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 13 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 15 Jun 2026 23:25:10 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=907121" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (1) TMI 1639 - SC Order</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469345</link>
      <description>Bail on parity was considered appropriate where the appellant&#039;s allegations were substantially similar to those against the co-accused, with only a marginally higher allegation concerning receipt and use of proceeds of crime. That aspect was left for trial, and completed investigation with filing of charge-sheet weighed against continued incarceration. On those facts, further custody was not justified and release on bail was warranted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 13 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469345</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>