J&K&L HC: Bail is Not Absolute For Juveniles in Heinous Cases and Can be Denied to Serve Justice || Delhi HC: Expired Driving Licenses Do Not Enjoy Deemed Continuity After 2019 MV Act Amendment || MP High Court: Ex-Gratia Payments are Dependents’ Last Hope and Rules Should be Applied Liberally || Orissa HC: SC’s Mihir Rajesh Shah Directive on Written Arrest Grounds Applies Prospectively || Delhi HC: Tenant Liable For Possession Through Family; Non-Residence Claim Doesn’t Excuse Liability || Allahabad High Court: Muslims Can Use Guardians and Wards Act Provisions to Seek Minor’s Custody || Delhi High Court: Earlier Buyer Can Seek Cancellation of a Later Sale; Prior Rights Prevail || Madras HC: 'Geetham' Restaurants Did Not Infringe 'Sangeetha' Trademark But Liable For Passing Off || Bombay High Court: Disabled Employee Shifted Cadre Can’t Claim Past Service Seniority || Supreme Court: Person Accepting a Section 28A Award May Seek Enhancement Via Appeals

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 :