SC: Recoveries U/S 27 of Evidence Act Alone Cannot Sustain Conviction; 1988 Murder Acquittal Restored || SC: Successive Impleadment Applications are Barred by Res Judicata under Different CPC Provisions || Supreme Court Halts Coercive Measures in CJP Protest Cases, Directs Release of Minors || Supreme Court: National Commission for Scheduled Castes Lacks Power to Pass Binding Orders || Bombay HC: Alleged Illegal Arrest Alone Cannot Trigger Contempt Action Against Police || Bombay HC Quashes Order against Taiwan National, Says Online Study Didn't Breach Visa Rules || P&H High Court Issues Directions on LADC Scheme After Reviewing Lawyers' Objections || Allahabad HC: Suspension of Sentence Plea Need Not Take Priority if Appeal is Ready || Allahabad High Court: Surcharge Recovery From Pradhan Must Follow Panchayat Raj Act Procedure || Allahabad HC Directs IB Probe into 4 Lucknow Lawyers, Raises Concern over Lawyer-Police Nexus

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 :