MANIK MADHUKAR SARVE & ORS. versus VITTHAL DAMUJI MEHER & ORS.
The Single Judge of the High Court erred in granting bail to respondent no.1 because the charge-sheet and forensic audit disclosed material indicating respondent's involvement in withdrawals far exceeding his investments and a money trail to properties in relatives' names; the High Court failed to apply the correct principles and to impose strict conditions appropriate to an economic offence affecting many depositors, therefore the bail order under Section 439(1) CrPC was set aside and respondent no.1 was directed to surrender within three weeks.
Source excerpt
- Bail
- Cancellation of bail
- Misappropriation of funds
- Conspiracy
- Tampering with evidence
- Supervening circumstances