https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=298822 Parity with a co-accused did not by itself justify release on bail in a serious economic offence, and the statutory proviso for women under Section 437(1) CrPC was treated as enabling rather than automatic entitlement. The Court relied on the alleged role of the petitioner as a promoter-director and major stakeholder, the continuing investigation, and documentary material indicating a money trail and prima facie involvement in the diversion of public deposits collected under livestock schemes. Because the allegations disclosed a deep-rooted conspiracy, substantial public loss, and risk of prejudice to the investigation, custody was not disturbed and bail was refused. en-us Mon, 25 Feb 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Sun, 21 Nov 2021 19:20:23 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=298822 Parity with a co-accused did not by itself justify release on bail in a serious economic offence, and the statutory proviso for women under Section 437(1) CrPC was treated as enabling rather than automatic entitlement. The Court relied on the alleged role of the petitioner as a promoter-director and major stakeholder, the continuing investigation, and documentary material indicating a money trail and prima facie involvement in the diversion of public deposits collected under livestock schemes. Because the allegations disclosed a deep-rooted conspiracy, substantial public loss, and risk of prejudice to the investigation, custody was not disturbed and bail was refused. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 25 Feb 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=298822