Supreme Court: Second Bail Order Must Record Changed Circumstances or Fresh Grounds || SC: Severity of Injury Alone Cannot Prove Attempt to Murder Without Intent to Cause Death || SC: Promissory Estoppel Cannot Be Used to Claim Unintended Benefits, Lays Down Principles || Kerala High Court: No Unrestricted RTI; DPDP Act Strengthens Privacy Framework || Allahabad High Court: Juvenile Offence Case Does Not Bar Govt Job In Adulthood || Gauhati HC: Burden Of Proving Citizenship Stays With Proceedee and Does Not Shift At Any Stage || Delhi HC: Property Disputes Between In-Laws and Daughter-In-Law are Not Exclusively For Family Court || Delhi High Court: After Probate is Granted, A Will Does Not Require Fresh Proof under Section 68 || Ker HC: Periodic Replacement and Maintenance of Prosthetic Limb Must Be Included in Compensation || Madras High Court: DNA Test Not Required For Mother to Donate Kidney to Her Son

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 :