Karnataka HC: Caste Slurs at Factory Dispatch Area Accessible to Workers Amount to Public View || Delhi HC: Lawyer’s Inability to Understand Lower Court Order Cannot Justify Delay in Filing Appeal || Delhi HC: POCSO Charges Stay Even If Minors Remain Unidentified In Child Sexual Exploitation Cases || J&K&L HC: Mere Abuse or Mentioning Caste Name Does Not Constitute an Offence under SC/ST Act || Tripura HC: Divorced Daughter Cannot Claim Family Pension if Divorce Happens After Parent’s Death || SC: Candidate Missing Physical Test Gets No Second Chance; Compassion Has No Place in Public Jobs || SC Grants Bail to Doctors as Were Not Provided in Writing, Citing 'Mihir Shah' Verdict || Supreme Court: Dowry Harassment and Domestic Abuse Persist, Showing Patriarchy Still Prevails || Supreme Court: Dowry Harassment and Domestic Abuse Persist, Showing Patriarchy Still Prevails || Supreme Court: Pay Commission Benefits Cannot Be Denied By Imposing Extra Conditions

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 :