<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2020 (5) TMI 429 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=395396</link>
    <description>Immediate bail or interim bail on COVID-19 and medical grounds was refused in a Companies Act prosecution because the allegations concerned a serious economic offence involving large-scale fraud, the investigation remained pending, and the applicant failed to show illness severe enough to make custody unsafe. The Court also noted that the High Powered Committee&#039;s pandemic release framework applied only within a specified punishment threshold, which the alleged offence exceeded. Given the gravity of the accusations and the risk of tampering with evidence, interim release was declined. The earlier bail order in a separate CBI matter was treated as inapplicable because the SFIO prosecution arose from a distinct statutory investigation under the Companies Act, 2013.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 05 May 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 20 May 2020 09:51:32 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=613286" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (5) TMI 429 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=395396</link>
      <description>Immediate bail or interim bail on COVID-19 and medical grounds was refused in a Companies Act prosecution because the allegations concerned a serious economic offence involving large-scale fraud, the investigation remained pending, and the applicant failed to show illness severe enough to make custody unsafe. The Court also noted that the High Powered Committee&#039;s pandemic release framework applied only within a specified punishment threshold, which the alleged offence exceeded. Given the gravity of the accusations and the risk of tampering with evidence, interim release was declined. The earlier bail order in a separate CBI matter was treated as inapplicable because the SFIO prosecution arose from a distinct statutory investigation under the Companies Act, 2013.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 05 May 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=395396</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>