https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=425518 Regular bail was granted in a prosecution under Section 447 of the Companies Act, 2013 after the Delhi HC distinguished the applicant's role from that of the main accused. The Court noted that the chartered accountant had not signed the relevant financial statements, had not derived financial benefit, had cooperated with the inquiry, and had remained subject to proceedings for a substantial period. It further held that the embargo under Section 212(6) did not bar bail because the Public Prosecutor had an opportunity to oppose the application and the Court was prima facie satisfied that the applicant was not guilty and was unlikely to reoffend. Bail was therefore allowed on conditions. en-us Mon, 18 Jul 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 19 Mar 2024 16:35:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=425518 Regular bail was granted in a prosecution under Section 447 of the Companies Act, 2013 after the Delhi HC distinguished the applicant's role from that of the main accused. The Court noted that the chartered accountant had not signed the relevant financial statements, had not derived financial benefit, had cooperated with the inquiry, and had remained subject to proceedings for a substantial period. It further held that the embargo under Section 212(6) did not bar bail because the Public Prosecutor had an opportunity to oppose the application and the Court was prima facie satisfied that the applicant was not guilty and was unlikely to reoffend. Bail was therefore allowed on conditions. Case-Laws Companies Law Mon, 18 Jul 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=425518