SC: Hindu Daughter-In-Law Widowed After Her Father-In-Law’s Death is Entitled to Maintenance || SC: Vendor Remains a Necessary Party in Specific Performance Suits Even After Transferring Property || Raj HC: Having Different Age Criteria For Contractual and Regular Appointments is Unconstitutional || Delhi HC: Registered Property Title Prevails over Claims Based on Oral Family Settlements || Gauhati HC: Only A Family Court Can Grant A Divorce under Muslim Law, Not A Civil Judge || Del HC: Courts Cannot Compel Lawyers to Disclose Sources of Documents Filed on Clients' Instructions || SC Explains When Shares Received After Company Amalgamation are Taxable as Business Income || SC: Excavators, Dumpers Etc Used Within Factories aren’t Motor Vehicles For Road Tax Purposes || SC: Complaints Alleging Fraud under Companies Act Can Be Filed Only By SFIO, Not By Private Parties || SC: Preventive Detention Cannot Override Bail and Requires Proof of a Threat to Public Order

R. Subramanian v. State of Tamil Nadu and Ors. - (High Court of Madras) (18 Sep 2015)

Madras High Court denies anticipatory bail to Subhiksha promoter

MANU/TN/2944/2015

Criminal

The Court denied anticipatory bail to R. Subramanian, noting that it had already passed lenient orders in the past in efforts to enable some repayment to depositors of the 49 accused companies that the Petitioner was associated with. Dismissing the petition, the Court held that it was not sufficiently shown that giving Mr. Subramanian unfettered access to his office without fear of arrest would advance the cause of the depositors, given the documents already seized by prosecution.

Tags : ANTICIPATORY BAIL DEPOSITORS ACCESS

Share :