Supreme Court: Uncrystallized Contractual Damages Not an Operational Debt under Section 9 IBC || Supreme Court: Interest Accrued in Suspense Account After NPA Classification is Recoverable as Debt || Supreme Court: S.69 GST Arrest Order with “Reasons to Believe” Must Precede Arrest || Supreme Court: Winding-Up Proceedings Period Cannot be Excluded under Section 14 Limitation Act || Supreme Court: Separate Appeals Unnecessary Against Common Judgment on Suit and Counterclaim || Supreme Court: Unsuccessful Party Can Seek Post-Award Section 9 Relief in Exceptional Cases || Delhi HC Rejects Black Money Act Challenge, Imposes Rs. 60,000 Costs over Prosecution Avoidance || Delhi HC Affirms Teacher's POCSO Conviction, Urges Schools to Encourage Children to Speak Up || Kerala HC: NGO Funding Peaceful Protests Can't Justify FCRA Renewal Denial || Delhi HC: Courts Cannot Judge Sufficiency of Material For Issuing Look Out Circular

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 :