Supreme Court: Non-Signatory Can Be Bound By an Agreement if Involved in Performing the Contract || Supreme Court: 'Washed-Off Theory' Inapplicable in Assessing Employee Retention Suitability || SC Directs States/UTs to Grant Ex-Servicemen Quota to Cadets Disabled 40% or More in Training || Delhi High Court Quashed Cases over Allegations of Excess Lead Content in Maggi Noodles || Madras High Court: Advocates Cannot Hinder Police From Producing Arrested Lawyers Before a Court || Allahabad HC Awarded Rs. 4.75 Lakh Compensation Over Illegal Vehicle Confiscation in a Beef Case || Allahabad High Court: Strong Suspicion, Not Proof of Guilt, is Sufficient to Frame Charges || Delhi HC: Prior Sanction Not Required Where Cognizance Preceded 2018 PC Act Amendment || Bombay High Court: The Notion of a "Perfect Victim" in Rape Cases is a Myth || Allahabad High Court: Prior Agreement With Inquiry Report Doesn't Vitiate Disciplinary Proceedings

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 :