1 APHC010282172025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3520] WEDNESDAY,THE THIRTIETH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A. HARI HARANADHA SARMA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 5882/2025 Between: 1. LINGALA MOJESH, S/O VARAPRASAD, AGE 29 YEARS, OCC. EX EMPLOYEE, R/O. DOOR NO. 105, KESANUPALLI, KESANUPALLI, CHILAKALURIPETA MANDAL, PALNADU DISTRICT, AP ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Through the State Addl. Supdt. Of Police CID, R.O, Guntur Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravathi. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Petition under Section 437/438/439/482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Courtpleased to grant Anticipatory Bail in the event of arrest to the petitioner/AI7 in Crime. No. 23 of 2024 of C.I.D Mangalagiri P.S., Guntur District U/s 318(4), 316(5), 61(2), BNS OF 2023 against the petitioners/accused A17 Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. PONNEKANTI MALLIKARJUNA RAO Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: 2 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A. HARI HARANADHA SARMA Crl.P.No.5882 of 2025 ORDER: Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, who appeared virtually and Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for the State. 2. Petitioner herein is arrayed as accused No.17 in Crime No.23 of 2024 of C.I.D., Mangalagiri Police Station, Guntur District registered with the allegations of committing the offences punishable under Sections 318(4), 316(5) 61(2) of BNS Act. Sequence of events and factual background, as per prosecution:- 3. [i] This is a case initially found as fraud of around 28 Crores committed by one Duda Naresh Chandra Shekar, Bank Manager of ICICI Bank and several others. [ii] During 3rd October, 2024 to 5th October, 2024, multiple complaints were received from various customers in the branches of ICICI Bank situated at Chilakaluripeta, Narsaraopeta, Bharati Nagar,Vijayawada from various customers, that the over draft facilities were taken on their Fixed Deposits, with the bank without knowledge or consent of the individual. [iii] Fixed Deposit holders complained that invalid Fixed Deposits were issued to them and it was also alleged by few customers that jewels handed to the Branch for loan purposes were also missing. 4. The modus of operandi of fraud is as follows:- 3 1. By availing Overdraft facilities against the Fixed Deposits of customers without customers’ knowledge or consent. 2. Cheques collected from the customers in the pretext of limit reduction in overdraft accounts were fraudulently diverted into third parties’ accounts 3. Serial Numbers mentioned in Fixed Deposit receipts provided to customers when checked, no such details were found in the Bank records. 4. Customers were issued with jewel loan receipts, without affixing any seal and signatures and no record was found with the given loan numbers in the Bank records. 5. Complaint to the above effect was given by Zonal Head of ICICI Bank, Vijayawada, on 07th October 2024 and a case is registered vide Crime Number mentioned above. 6. During investigation, cheating, criminal breach of trust, conspiracy for personal gain etc., were found to a tune of 67 Crores. Statements of 118 witnesses were recorded. Some accused were arrested and investigation is pending. Specific case against the petitioner herein/A17 7. As per the confession of the accused No.1, the petitioner herein/A17 looked after the works of accounts and had knowledge of activities of A1 and connived with A1 in utilizing the accounts of third parties like F.D.Rs., O.Ds. and Gold loans. He has transferred the amounts to the persons and Firms through account of his mother. The petitioner/A17 has purchased a Volvo Car in the name of the petitioner, THAR Car in the name of his mother and handed 4 over those Cars to A1, and obtained financial gains from the crime proceeds, thus involved in the fraud. Details of accounts of the petitioner/A17 and his investments etc., are to be verified. Statements of some witnesses examined indicating the collusion between A1 and A17 and diverting funds of customers etc. Defence of the petitioner/A17 8. [i] He is innocent. [ii] His case is foisted with false allegations. [iii] The alleged Volvo Car is of the year 2013, registration particulars of the Car No.AP 31 CH 44 55, indicating transactions in the name of the petitioner between 07.10.2024 to 12.11.2024 around a period of one (01) month. Subsequently it was transferred to the name of others. That aspect cannot be the basis to draw any inference at this stage and the petitioner is not entrusted with any funds etc., and even as per prosecution, he is only concerned with opening of accounts etc. [iv] He is ready to co-operate with the Police for investigation. 9. Point for determination: Whether the petitioner/A17 is entitled for the relief of pre-arrest bail in respect of Crime No. 23 of 2024 of C.I.D., Mangalagiri Police Station, in terms of Section 482 of BNSS? If so, on what conditions? 10. The opposition of prosecution is that in organized and schematic way fraud is committed against public funds deposited with a Bank which is having a good reputation. Important material is to be received including diversion of 5 funds, for which custodial interrogation is also necessary. If pre-arrest bail is granted at this stage, the petitioner likely to tamper evidence by contacting the witnesses etc. and he may not be even available for further legal process. Precedential guidance:- 11. The Hon’ble Apex Court, while referring the observations made in Shri Gurbaksh Singh Sibba Vs. State of Punjab1, in Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi)2, vide Special Leave Petition in Crime No.7281, 7282 of 2017, dated 29.01.2020, observed that certain parameters kept in view, while dealing with the applications for grant of pre-arrest bail. They are as follows:- “(i) The nature and gravity of the accusation and the exact role of the accused must be properly comprehended before arrest is made; (ii) The antecedents of the applicant including the fact as to whether the accused has previously undergone imprisonment on conviction by a court in respect of any cognizable offence; (iii) The possibility of the applicant to flee from justice; (iv) The possibility of the accused's likelihood to repeat similar or the other offences. (v) Where the accusations have been made only with the object of injuring or humiliating the applicant by arresting him or her. (vi) Impact of grant of anticipatory bail particularly in cases of large magnitude affecting a very large number of people. (vii) The courts must evaluate the entire available material against the accused very carefully. The court must also clearly comprehend the exact role of the accused in the case. The cases in which accused is implicated with the help of Sections 34 and 149 of the Penal Code, 1860 the court should consider with even greater care and caution because over implication in the cases is a matter of common knowledge and concern; 1 1980 AIR 1632; 1980 SCR (3) 383; (1980) 2 SCC 565 2 (2020) 5 SCC 1 6 (viii) While considering the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail, a balance has to be struck between two factors, namely, no prejudice should be caused to the free, fair and full investigation and there should be prevention of harassment, humiliation and unjustified detention of the accused; (ix) The court to consider reasonable apprehension of tampering of the witness or apprehension of threat to the complainant; (x) Frivolity in prosecution should always be considered and it is only the element of genuineness that shall have to be considered in the matter of grant of bail and in the event of there being some doubt as to the genuineness of the prosecution, in the normal course of events, the accused is entitled to an order of bail.” 12. Offences and punishment:- SECTION NATURE OF OFFENCE PUNISHMENT BAILABLE OR NON- BAILABLE COGNIZABLE OR NON-COGNIZABLE 61(2) CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY Imprisonment for 6 months or fine or both Bailable Non-Congnizable 316(5) CRIMINAL BREACH OF TRUST Imprisonment for life or Imprisonment for upto 10 years and fine Non- Bailable Cognizable 318(4) CHEATING Imprisonment for 7 years and fine Non- Bailable Cognizable Factors that contribute for answering the point:- 13. [i] Case is indicating financial fraud to a tune of 69 Crores. [ii] The case is indicating involvement of several accused and several witnesses and victims. [iii] As per prosecution there is necessity as to custodial interrogation for eliciting of information as to diversion of funds and its recovery etc. 7 [iv] The petitioner/accused is in-charge of opening of accounts and the allegation is cheating the customers taking Over Drafts and diversion of funds without consent of customers, furnishing fake F.D. Bonds etc.. [v] Investigation is pending. 14. The points canvassed by the accused are that good number of witnesses are examined, the several other accused have got regular bail. 15. Upon considering the facts and circumstances of the case, stage of investigation and nature and gravity of the accusation etc., it is found that this is not a fit case for grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner. Point No.1 is answered accordingly against the petitioner. 16. In the result, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. ______________________________ A.HARI HARANADHA SARMA, J Date: 30.07.2025 Pnr 8 9 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A. HARI HARANADHA SARMA Crl.P.No.5882 of 2025 Dated 30.07.2025 Pnr