SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

K.T.SANKARAN
Harish Babu Maddineni – Appellant
Versus
State of Kerala – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Petitioner:Rajit, Advocate.
For the Respondent: K.I. Abdul Rasheed, Addl. Director General of Prosecution.

ORDER

K.T. Sankaran, J.—The petitioner in these Bail Applications is Dr. Harish Babu Maddineni. He is an accused in hundreds of cases of similar nature.

2. Bail Applications filed by the petitioner were dismissed by a detailed order dated 31st October, 2011 (reported in 2011(4) KLT 637). For the sake of convenience, the facts of the case as narrated in 2011(4) KLT 636 are extracted below:

“6. The prosecution case is the following: The petitioner started a Company, namely, Nano Excel Enterprises Private Limited and it was registered at Hyderabad on 12.7.2007. In January 2010, the petitioner started another company under the name and style Nano Excel Power Corporation Limited. On 26.2.2010, the name of the company was changed as Nano Excel Corporation Limited. The accused collected crores of rupees from the general public under the guise of marketing products and also under the guise of providing shares in an alleged 100 M.V. Power Plant at Arunachal Pradesh. Wide publicity was given through media and otherwise by the petitioner that the Nano Excel Power Corporation had entered into an agreement with the Government of Arunachal Pradesh for establishing a 100 M.V. Power Plant at Arun

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top