SC: Disciplinary Proceedings Cannot Follow if an Officer is Discharged on the Same Charge || SC Clarified the Distinction Between Arbitration “Seat” And “Venue” While Summarising Key Principles || Supreme Court: Wife and Her Family Cannot Be Prosecuted For Dowry-Giving Based On Her Complaint || SC: Plaint Cannot Be Rejected Under Order VII Rule 11 CPC on the Ground of Order II Rule 2 Bar || Supreme Court Has Issued an SOP Prescribing Strict Timelines For Filing Legal Aid Appeals || Madras HC: Dhurandhar 2 Release Cannot be Stalled Due to Objections From a Small Section || Delhi HC: Lokpal May Form Prima Facie Opinion Before Show Cause Notice Without Prior Hearing || Bom HC: Family Courts Cannot Casually Order a Spouse’s Medical Examination to Assess Mental Health || Bombay HC: Child Care Leave Protects Motherhood and Denial Violates Rights of Mother and Child || Supreme Court: Amalgamating Company Loss Cannot be Set Off Against Amalgamated Income

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 :