Just a moment...
Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the applicant was entitled to immediate release on bail or interim bail on account of COVID-19 and alleged medical vulnerability in a prosecution under the Companies Act, 2013.
Analysis: The relief was sought as a limited interim release during the pandemic, but the Court found that the offence alleged was a serious economic offence involving large-scale fraud, that investigation was still pending, and that the applicant did not establish such serious illness as to make jail custody unsafe. The Court also noted that the High Powered Committee's COVID-19 relief framework applied to undertrial prisoners within the specified punishment threshold, whereas the present allegations carried a higher maximum punishment. In view of the nature and gravity of the accusation, the stage of investigation, and the apprehension of tampering with evidence, the Court declined to grant interim release. The Court further held that the earlier bail order in the CBI case did not control the present SFIO prosecution, which arose from a distinct statutory investigation under the Companies Act, 2013.
Conclusion: The request for immediate bail or interim bail was rejected.
Ratio Decidendi: In a serious economic offence under a special statute, interim release on COVID-19 or medical grounds may be refused where the punishment is above the committee threshold, investigation is pending, and the Court finds a real apprehension of tampering with evidence.