Extracts from the High Court order dated 11/02/2005 on the petition for anticipatory bail in accounts falsification case

This was the observation made by The Honourable Justice Sri. M. Thanikachalam in the Criminal Original Petition no: 1985/2005, while granting anticipatory bail.

Advocate Mr. K. S. Dinakaran and Mr. M. Sathyanarayana appeared on behalf of His Holiness (Petitioner) and Mr. K. Duraiswamy, Public Prosecutor was the respondent.

Here is an extract from paragraph 2 of the order:

“The learned Public Prosecutor says that as on this date, the materials collected so far, are not sufficient to rope in this petitioner as accused. It seems, an attempt is being made to rope in this petitioner as the accused for the falsification of accounts etc., probably to screen the evidence in a murder case. However, the learned Public Prosecutor fairly concedes as on this date, there is no material to implicate this petitioner as accused, since the materials collected are not sufficient. It is not the case of the prosecution that there is no proposal to implicate this petitioner as accused in this crime number. Since no definite case has been made out by prosecution, or that they are not going to implicate this petitioner. Thus apprehension of petitioner is well founded and therefore, he is entitled to seek Anticipatory Bail. Further for completing the investigation, if any, for the said offences, custodial interrogation may not be necessary”

>>

Home | Site Search | Today's Update | Court Matters | Media Scan | Points to Ponder | You said it

Miscellaneous | Campaign for Dharma| Photo Gallery | Tid Bits

 

© Copyright kanchi-sathya.org
No part of this web site may be reproduced without explicit permission from the webmaster.
Some material put up on this web site are protected by individual copyrights of the concerned organisations.
This site is optimised for 800 x 600 resolution or higher.