<?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>2017 (7) TMI 1481 - ORISSA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464736</link>
    <description>HC dismissed bail applications, finding strong prima facie evidence of conspiracy and repeated economic offences under IPC and relevant deposit-protection statutes. Recorded registers, statements and antecedents show applicants took/owed substantial sums (registers indicating Rs.12,00,000 and loans with outstanding dues totalling crores), victimizing 641 depositors and collecting over four crores. The court held the conduct was continuous, organized and caused large public loss, with deep-rooted collusion with co-accused and ongoing investigation likely to take time. Granting bail would prejudice public interest; appeal and bail petitions were rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 19 Jul 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 12 Nov 2025 13:57:24 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=864026" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (7) TMI 1481 - ORISSA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464736</link>
      <description>HC dismissed bail applications, finding strong prima facie evidence of conspiracy and repeated economic offences under IPC and relevant deposit-protection statutes. Recorded registers, statements and antecedents show applicants took/owed substantial sums (registers indicating Rs.12,00,000 and loans with outstanding dues totalling crores), victimizing 641 depositors and collecting over four crores. The court held the conduct was continuous, organized and caused large public loss, with deep-rooted collusion with co-accused and ongoing investigation likely to take time. Granting bail would prejudice public interest; appeal and bail petitions were rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 19 Jul 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464736</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>