Supreme Court: Joint Disciplinary Proceedings Not Mandatory in Cases Involving Multiple Officers || Supreme Court: Transferred Students Cannot Claim Government Fees After College Loses Recognition || Supreme Court: Arbitration Clause Applies When Earlier Agreement is Imported “Body and Soul” || J&K&L High Court: Seasonal Labourers Cannot Be Regularised Amid Government’s Blanket Ban || Delhi High Court: Silence Amid Sustained Vilification May Undermine Public Confidence In Judiciary || Calcutta HC Stays Eastern Railway Eviction Drive Affecting Around 6,000 Slum Dwellers Near Station || J&K&L HC: Repeated Arrests U/S 107 Crpc After UAPA Bail Can be Fresh PSA Detention Grounds || Del HC: Arrest Memo Listing Only Reasons Cannot Substitute Person-Specific Grounds of Arrest || SC: Hostile Witness Testimony Can Support Acquittal as Well, Not Only Conviction || SC: Appointing Candidates on Contract Against Advertised Regular Posts is Patently Illegal

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 :