Madhya Pradesh High Court: Victims Must be Given a Hearing Even Before Closure Report Rejection || Delhi HC: Payment of ‘Pagri’ Does Not Render Tenancy Non-Terminable, Allowing Eviction || Ker HC Examined Whether Electro-Homeopathy Can be Practised Without Registration under Medical Laws || Delhi HC: Better Possessory Title Holder Can Recover Property From Occupant Without Superior Right || Bombay High Court: Compensatory Afforestation Must Be in Same or Nearby Locality For Residents || Bombay High Court Protects ‘MEFTAL-SPAS’, Restrains Use of Similar Drug Brand || Supreme Court: Inclusion in Revised Select List Does Not Give TN MV Inspectors a Vested Right || Bombay HC: ICC Cannot Hear Sexual Harassment Complaint over Non-Employer Transport Incident || Ker HC Upholds Rule that Homeopathic Doctors Must Cancel Registration Before Enrolment as Advocates || J&K&L HC: Evidence Negating Penetration Warrants Conviction For Attempt to Rape, Not Rape

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 :