SC: Magistrates Should Not Record Prosecution Evidence in Sessions-Triable Cases || Supreme Court Lays Down Guidelines on Using ITRs to Assess Motor Accident Victims' Income || Supreme Court: Citing AI-Generated Fake Precedents Amounts to Advocate Misconduct || Bombay HC: Horse-Trading Rampant in Maharashtra, FIRs 'Washed' After Switching Sides || Tripura High Court: Senior Citizens Cannot be Penalised For Failing to Follow Cases Online || Delhi High Court: Parent Cannot Gain Advantage by Keeping a Child Against a Foreign Court Order || Allahabad HC: Places of Worship Act Bars Conversion of Religious Character, Not State Acquisition || Jharkhand HC: Single Instance of Mother-In-Law Abusing Daughter-In-Law Does Not Amount to Cruelty || Madras High Court: No Appeal Lies Against E-Court Status or Adjournment Orders || Chhattisgarh HC: Judicial Officer Promotion Cannot be Denied on Complaint Without Disciplinary Action

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 :