I,€ * lN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMA THURSDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE `:PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SREENIVASA REDDY Between : CRIMIN-AL PETITION NO: 58 OF 2025 sri N.Sanjay lps, S/o Late. NN Murthy, Aged about 57 years (A1), Former Dir6ctor General, AP State Disaster Response and Fire Services and also ADGP CID, Vijayawada, AP presently residing at Flat No. 927, Maple Block, Dwaraka Krishna Rain Tree Park Apartments, Namburu, Guntur District. ...Petitioner/Accused No.1 AND The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by I-ts specI'aI Standing Counsel for ACB, High Court of A.P. at Amaravatj ...Respondent/complainant petition under section 482 of BNSS Act r/w Section 438 of Cr.P.C, praying that in the circumstances stated in the memorandum of grounds filed in support of the criminal petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct release of the petitioner on Bail in the event of his arrest pursuant to the registration of FIR No. 05/RCO-CIU-ACB/2024 Dated 24.12.2024 of PS, ACB, CIU, AP, Vl-jayawada [A NO: petition under section 482(l1) of BNSS/438(1) of Cr.P.C praying that I'n the circumstances stated in the memorandum of grounds filed in support of the petitl'on, the High Court may be pleased to grant interim anticipatory ba" to the petl®tioner in the event of his arrest pursuant to the registration of FIR No. o5/RCO-CIU-ACB/2024 Dated 24.12.2024 of PS, ACB, CIU, AP, Vijayawada,i pending disposal of CRLP 58 of 2025, on the file of the HI'gh Court. The Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the petition and the memorandum of grounds filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of SRI S DUSHYANTH REDDY, Advocate for the petitioner, and of PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, for the Respondent, the court made the following J/ THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K. SREENIVASA REDDY CRIMINAL PETITION No. 58 0F 2O25 ORDER : This Criminal Petition, under Section 4+8,2 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, tBNSS), is filed by petitioner/A.1, seeking anticipatory bail in connection with F`IR No.O5/RCO-CIU-ACE of 2024, dated 24.12.2O24 registered by the ACE, CIU, Andhra Pradesh for the offences punishable under Sections 4O9, 42O, 477A read with 12OB of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, tIPC9) and 13 (1) (a) read with 13 (2) and 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 as amended in 2O18 (for short, tthe PC Act). 2. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, CIU, ACE, Vijayawada prepared an occurrence report dated 24.12.2O24, and based on the factual aspects mentioned therein and on the orders of the Director General of ACE, AP, VIjayawada dated 24.12.2024, the aforesaid crime came to be registered against the petitioner herein and others. ```- `_ty ---z-jr- |,-Z*_, ~r 3. The Chief Secretary to the Government of Andhra Pradesh forwarded Memo No.2592927/SC.D/ A1/2O24-3, dated O3.12.2024 of General Administration (SC-D) Department to the Director General of ACE along with detailed enquiry reports of the vigilance and Enforcement Department bearing No.62 (C.No.4828/ V&E/See.II/D1/2024), dated 18.1O.2O24 and No.63 (C.No.4828/V&E/See-II/D1/2O24) dated 3O.1O.2O24 submitted by the Director General, Vigilance a Enforcement vide letters dated 18.10.2O24 and 3O.10.2O24 respectively, to the Government, regarding certain allegations against petitioner, who worked as the Director General, A.P. State Disaster Response and Fire Services and the Additional Director General, Crime Investigation Department, with a request to conduct enquiry into the allegations of misappropriation of funds by him. Thereafter, the Director General, ACB addressed a letter dated 12.12.2O24 to the Chief Secretary to the Government to accord permission under section 17A of the PC Act to conduct a regular enquiry/investigation ~->i -J^ I/ into the allegations against him. Pursuant to the same, the Government accorded permission Vide Memo No.2592927/SC.D/A1/2O24, dated 20.12.2024 of General Administration (SC-D) Department according permission as required under Section 17A of the PC Act. 4. Thereafter, on the instructions of the Director General of ACE, vide Memo dated 24.12.2024, to register a RCO case and to investigate into the allegations against the petitioner and on perusal of the aforesaid Vigilance reports, the Deputy Superintendent of Police, CIU, ACE, Vijayawada registered the present case against the petitioner herein and others. 5. Occurrence Report dated 24.12.2024 has been enclosed along with the First Information Report. In the Occurrence Report, the observations and findings of the Vigilance and Enforcement Department in the enquiry reports No.62 (C.No.4828/V&E/See.II/ D1/2O24), dated 18.1O.2O24 and No.63 (C.No.4828/V&E / See-II/D1/2O24) dated 3O.1O.2O24, are mentioned. ``=-, =1_- ._ --'` 6. The observations and findings in enquiry report of the Vigilance and Enforcement Department No.62 (C.No.4828/V&E/See.II/ D1/2024), dated 18.10.2O24, as mentioned in the occurrence Report, are as under: (a) The petitioner/A.1, during his tenure as the Director General of A.P. State Disaster Response and F`ire Services(APSDRFS), manipulated tender processes for awarding contract work of Development and Maintenance of AGNI-NOC (Automated Governance a NOC integration) Web Portal, Mobile App and supply of hardware, to M/s. Sauthrika Technologies a Infra Private Limited (Accused No.2), in violation of the procedures in vogue and dishonestly and fraudulently facilitated payment of Rs.59,93,OOO/-to the said firm On 22.02.2023 i.e. within one week after entering into agreement on 15.02.2023, though there was no much progress in the development of AGNI-NOC portal. It is further alleged that on the same day i.e. on 22.02.2023, A.2 firm claimed Rs.26,OO,OOO/- more, towards 50O/o -S \ -> efe32ff3) I/ development of AGNI Portal and Mobile App, and the Technical Committee constituted by successor of petitioner/A.1 on 2O.O4.2023 for assessing progress of work, evaluated that A.2 firm executed Only 14% of the work till such date, and thereby the petitioner/A.1 acted in haste, abused his power, breached the trust reposed in him as a Public Servant and his acts caused misappropriation of Government funds. (b) It is further alleged that petitioner/A.1, while working as D.G. of APSDRFS, procured 101aptops from the said firm ViZ. Accused No.2, at an exorbitant price of Rs.17,89,784/- i.e. Rs.1,78,978/- per each laptop, without calling for any tenders through e-procurement, without submitting bills, besides not obtaining any competitive quotations from different vendors or firms in violation of G.O.Ms.No.258, Finance (TFR) Department, dated 2O.O9.2O13 which envisages that materials/stores costing more than Rs.1.00 lakh shall be procured through e-platform only. ` _--t_-_ Q`_3 `szzzsiz? ~/ (c) It is further alleged that the petitioner/A.1, while working as the D.G., APSDRFS, had not properly monitored progress of AGNI NOC Portal, leading to delays and incomplete work, and by the time of constitution of the Committee by his successor to monitor the project, significant damage had already caused drie to lack of early oversight, and that no formal reviews or assessments were conducted to evaluate the progress of the work allowing Accused No.2 to submit exaggerated progress reports without any checks or balances. It is further alleged that while working as such, petitioner/A.1 abused his position to expedite release of funds to Accused No.2 without proper authorization or verification Of WOrk Progress, inSPite Of concerns .raised by some department officials about the lack of progress and thereby he contravened financial protocols which require verification of work before funds can be disbursed. 7. The observations and findings in enquiry report of the Vigilance and Enforcement Department 'pr* p* ` ;irfi3f9 + No.63 (C.No.4828/V&E / See-II/D1/2O24) dated 30.10.2O24, as mentioned in the Occurrence Report, are as under: The petitioner/A.1, while working as Additional Director General of CID in the year 2023, connived with others and manipulated tender processes for awarding contract work of conducting Awareness Meetings/ workshops for sos/sTs on the SCs/STs (PoA) Act to M/s. Kritvyap Technologies Private Limited (Accused No.3) which was not existent and was not found in the address i.e. Flat No.601, Lalithanjali Apartment, Dwarakapuri Colony, Hyderabad, and though the said firm Was not at all involved in conducting the awareness meetings/workshops for SCs/ STs, which were in really conducted by the officials Of Regional CID offices, petitioner/A.1 facilitated payment of Rs.1,19,O3,6OO/-to Accused No.3 dishonestly and fraudulently, causing misappropriation of govemment funds. It is further alleged that pre-qualification Criterion for Participating bidders was not verified Properly during the process and `-i-`>a _-zzzs2Z2 f/ Accused No.2 was being operated at the address where Accused Nc,.3 company is ought to be operated and thus the Accused Nos. 2 and 3 are one and the same. It is further alleged that Awareness Programmes were shorn to be conducted on 27.O1.2O24, 28.O1.2O24 and 29.O1.2024, even before entering of agreement with Accused No.3 on 3O.O1.2O24, and petitioner/A.1 sanctioned an amount of Rs.59,52,5OO/- and Rs.59,51,loo/- respectively towards sos a sTs Awareness Workshops on the same date of the agreement on 3O.O1.2O24. It is further alleged that only Rs.3,10,OOO/-was incurred against the agreement value of Rs.1,19,03,60O/-which indicates gross embezzlement of government funds to a tune of Rs.1,15,93,6OO/-. 8. It is, therefore, alleged that the petitioner/A.1, during his tenure as the Director General of APSDRFS, actively connived with others in manipulating tender processes for awarding contract work of Development and Maintenance of AGNI-NOC (Automated Govemance a NOC integration) Web Portal, Mobile App and supply of S`` .fro~ ezf3ZZZ2 + 1 hardware, to Accused No.2, in violation of the procedures in vogue, leading to misappropriation of government funds to a tune of Rs.59,93,OOO/-; that the petitioner/A.1, while working as Additional Director General, CID, awarded the contract of conducting Awareness Meetings/ Workshops for sos/STs on the SCs/STs (PoA) Act to Accused No.3, which was non- existent company, by showing undue favour to the firms of his choice, leading to misappropriation of government funds to a tune of Rs.1,15,93,6OO/-, and r;sorted to corrupt and illegal means not adhering to the procedures in vogue, and showed nonfeasance in initiating action against Accused No.2 though they failed to show much progress in development of AGNI-NOC portal and inspite of facilitating payments to the said firm, Causing wrongful gain to others and loss to the government exchequer, which tantamount to criminal misconduct, criminal misappropriation, criminal breach of ,trust and criminal conspiracy, and in the capacity of being a publi-c servant, entrusted with public property and having I ±_cJ l cc2ZZ3ZZZ) 10 ~7 domain over the same, committed breach of trust, attracting the offences alleged. 9. Heard the learned senior counsel Sri S.Sriram, appearing for sri s.Dushyanth Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner, assisted by the learned counsel Sri Sai Saran Chodisetty and the learned Advocate General appearing for the respondent-state. 1O. The learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the present complaint has been flled after lapse of one year and ten months and there is absolutely no explanation whatsoever for launching the prosecution with abnormal delay; that the alleged payments were made in the month of February, 2O23 and the present prosecution has been launched on 24.12.2O24. The learned senior counsel further submitted that except the offence punishable under Section 409 IPC, the other offences alleged are punishable with less than 7 years imprisonment. It is his submission that the petitioner was the Head of the ±=--.. =I_ _.-ir,=iv-J- ll Jr Department and was only a supervising Authority, and in order to award a work or to make payment, there is a procedure contemplated, whereunder a file has to be processed by different offices at different stages, and the petitioner issued orders after having been satisfied that the entire procedure contemplated is followed. The leamed senior counsel further submitted that the work order was issued on 25.1O.2023 in view of the pressure from the Govemment to launch the +APP, and the successful bidder started working on it and made it available to the general public immediately after entering into the agreement; that amounts were paid to the company concerned up to the stage where the work was completed. He further submitted that AGNI App was successfully developed and launched by the then Home Minister and the Principal Secretary to Home Department in the prestigious investors9 summit, and in connection with that, an Award was given by the Kerala Government for this App. He submitted that on 29.O5.2023, a show-cause notice was issued by the €_-i `. -t3fZSrf. 12 J9 successor of the petitioner seeking explanation for the delay and measures for expedition of the project, and aggrieved by the same, A.2 approached this court by way of filing W.P.No.13793 of 2O23, and by an order dated 21.O6.2023, this Court directed the authority concerned not to take any coercive steps and the said interim order is still subsisting. The learned senior counsel further submitted that a Tender was called for, for supply of Laptops, and the i-pods and surface laptops are now being utilized by the Department. He further emphasized that awareness camps for SCs/STs were successfully conducted and after giving certirlCate for Satisfactory by the officer concerned, amounts were released therefor. The leamed senior counsel further submitted that there is absolutely no accusation against the petitioner attracting the offence punishable under section 4O9 IPC. It is his further submission that the petitioner was suspended from service immediately when the former opposition party came into power in June, 2024 and he \ ``=-= ~`± `----, --fi, 13 Jr wis directed to attend the office Of the Director General of Police without assigning any work and without payment of any salary, and as such, the question of the petitioner tampering with the evidence or material would not arise. He submits that the petitioner is an Ips officer and entered into service in the year 1996 and he is a cardiac patient diagnosed with coronary artery disease (triple vessel disease) and underwent a coronary artery bypass graft in July, 2023. Hence, he prays to consider the request of the petitioner for anticipatory bail. In support of his contention, the leamed senior counsel relied on the following decisions. (L) in N.Raghauerider u. State of Andhra Pradesh, CBJ], wherein it is held thus: (paragraphs 45 to 48) "ingredients rvecessary to prove a, ch;urge under Section 4O9IPC 45. Section 409IPC pertains to criminal breach of trust by a public servant or a banker, in respect of the property entrusted to him. The onus is on the prosecution to prove that the accused, a public servant or a banker was entrusted with the property 1 (2021) 18 SCC 70 =i* ,,-1 |~ -± _2ZZ2fZP ® 14 ~/ which, he is duly bound to account for and that he has committed criminal breach of trust. (SeeScidhupcut NagesuJara Raov. State of A.P. lSad,1"pafi Nageswara Raov. Stcite of A.P., (2O12) 8 SCC 547 : (2O12) 3 SCC (Cri) 979 : (2O12) 2 SCC (L&S) 638] ) 46.The entrustment of public property and dishonest misappropriation or use thereof in the manner illustrated under Section 4O5 are a s{'7te qLtCl 7tO7t for making an Offence Punishable under Section 4O9IPC. The expression «criminal breach of trust'' is defined under Section 405IPC which provides, inter alia, that whoever being in any manner entrusted with property or with any dominion over a property, dishonestly misappropriates or converts to his our use that property, or dishonestly uses or disposes of that property contrary to law, or in violation of any law prescribing the mode in which such trust is to be discharged, or contravenes any legal contract, express or implied, etc. shall be held to have committed criminal breach of trust. Hence, to attract Section 405IPC, the following ingredients must be satisfied: 46.1. Entrusting any person with property or with any dominion over property. 46.2. That person has dishonestly misappropriated or converted that property to his own use. - ---- 15 r/ 46.3.Or that person is dishonestly using or disposing of that property or wilfully suffering any other person so to do in violation of any direction of law or a legal contract. 47. It ought to be noted that the crucial word used in Section 4O5IPC is ttdishonestly'J and therefore, it pre-supposes the existence ofmens real In other words, mere retention of property entrusted to a person without any misappropriation cannot fall within the ambit of criminal breach of trust. unless there is some actual use by the accused in violation of law or contract, coupled with dishonest intention, there is no criminal breach of trust. The second significant expression is t{misappropriates'' which means improperly setting apart for ones use and to the exclusion of the owner. 48. No sooner are the two fundamental ingredients of «criminal breach of trust» within the meaning of Section 405IPC proved, and if such criminal breach is caused by a public servant or a banker, merchant or agent, the said offence of criminal breach of trust is punishable under Section 409IPC, for which it is essential to prove that: (I) The accused must be a public servant or a banker, merchant or agent; (j1) He/She must have been entrusted, Jifi Such capacity, with property; and + piris6E5j5ed 16 (l'z]) He/She must +have committed breach of trust in respect of such property.Jj ¢ij1) in Cormmon Ccunse, a registered socierty a. uhi,on of J71C!{'Cl a Of71e7lS2, wherein it is held thus: (paragraphs 167 to 173) ''167. This brings us to the definition of the offence of ttCriminal Breach of TrustJ' as defilned in Section 4O5 of the penal Code, 1860 which, minus the Explanation, provides as under: u405. CrirTinal breach of trust.-Whoever, being ±n any manner entrusted with property, or with any dominion over property, dishonestly misappropriates or converts to his own use that Property, Or dishonestly uses or disposes of that property in violation of any direction of law prescribing the mode in which such trust is to be discharged, or of any legal contract, express or implied, which he has made touching the discharge of such trust, or wilfully suffers any other person so to do, commits tcriminal breach of trustj.'' 168. A trust contemplated by Section 4O5 would arise only when there is an entrustment of property or dominion over property. There has, therefore, to be a property belonging to someone which is entrusted to the person accused of the offence 2(1999) 6 SCC667 +i i_ ==.+ EEEEEEEEEi 17 I? under Section 4O5. The entrustment of property creates a trust which is only an obligation annexed to the ownership of the property and arises out of a confidence reposed and accepted by the owner. This is what has been laid inStcl£e o/ Gujaratv. Jaswautlal Nathalal lA;IR 1968 SC 700 '. (1968) 2 SCR 408] . In Rczshml' KtJmC{rV. MclhesJI Kttmclr BhacZcl I(1997) 2 SCC 397 : 1997 SCC (Cri) 415] the essential ingredients for establishing the offence of criminal breach of trust, as deflned in section 405, have been spelt'' out as follows: (SCC pp. 4O6-07, para 13) ¢(1) entrusting any Person With Property Or With any dominion over property; (j1) the Person entrusted dishonestly misappropriating or converting to his olm use that property; or dishonestly using or disposing of that property or wilfully suffering any other person so to do in violation of any direction of law prescribing the mode in which such trust is to be discharged, or of any legal contract made touching the discharge of such trust.» 169. In this case, the earlier decision in Prczfjbhcz Rcl7t£ V. SzJraj KtJmClr [(1985) 2 SCC 37O : 1985 SCC (Cri) 18O] was affirmed. The case essentially related to the entrustment of ttStridhan'', but nevertheless, it is important in the sense that the ingredients of I the offence are set out and discussed. In Che!!oor McLnkhal Narayan lttiraui Nambudiriv. State of -pe--` €=4 ,--a l8 r/ rraz,czncore-Coch!'r1 I(1952) 2 SCC 392 : AIR 1953 SC 478 : 1954 Cri LJ IO2] it was laid down that every breach of trust in the absence of mens rea or dishonest intention cannot legally justify a criminal pro secution. 17O. The expressions ¢entrusted with propertyj' and ttwith any dominion over property» used in section 4O5 came to be considered by this court ±n CBIv. Dunccus Agro Iridustries Ltd. I(1996) 5 SCC 591 : 1996 SCC (Cri) 1O45 .-AIR 1996 SC 2452] and the view earlier expressed was reiterated. It was held that the expression «entrusted'' has wide and different implication in different contexts and the expression ¢trust» has been used to denote various kinds, of relationships like trustee and beneficiary, bailor and bailee, master and servant, pledger and pledgee. 171. Mr K. Parasaran contended that «power to allot Petrol pumps'', and that too under discretionary quota, cannot be treated as ¢propertyJ' within the meaning of Section 405 of the Penal Code, 1860. It is pointed out by him that the Minister merely makes an order of allotment. subsequently, the Indian oil Corporation or the Bharat petroleum Corporation enters into a dealership agreement with that person and the business is regulated ty the agreeinent between the allottee and the corporation <`- *T~ 19 f/ (Indian Oil Corporation or Bharat Petroleum Corporation). It is also pointed out that in pursuance of the agreement, the allottee invests money, constructs the building and sets up the petrol pump. Mere exercise of t{power to allot9', it is rightly contended, cannot, therefore, be treated as t{property'' within the meaning of Section 405, capable of being misutilised or misappropriated. 172. The word tcpropertyJJ, used in section 4O9 IPC means the property which can be entrusted or over which dominion may be exercised. This Court in R.K. DczJmt'czv. De!hI-Ac!m7t. [AIR 1962 SC 1821 : (1963) 1 SCR 253] held that the word ttproperty'', used in Section 405 IPC, has to be interpreted in a wider sense as it is not restricted by any qualification under Section 405. It was held that whether an offence defined in that section could be said to have been committed would depend not on the interpretation of the word ttproperty9J but on the fact whether that particular kind of property could be subject to the acts covered by that section. That is to say, the word tcproperty" would cover that kind of property with respect to which the offence contemplated in that section could be committed. 173.Having regard to the facts of the case discussed above and the ingredients of the 'dffence constituting criminal breach of trust, as defined in +`- c`. I;-----^ 20 /r Section 4O5, or the offence as set out in section 409 IPC, we are of the opinion that there was no case made out against the petitioner for any case being registered against him on the basis of the judgment passed by this Court nor was there any occasion to direct an investigation by CBI in that case.» ll. On the other hand, the leamed Advocate General appearing on behalf of respondent/state, while reiterating the averments mentioned in the counter, vehemently contended that there is deception entertained by the petitioner, right from the beginning in awarding the contract to A.2 and A.3. According to him, in order to award the contract to the co-accused, the petitioner is alleged to have committed manipulations with a view to favour A.2 and A.3. He further submitted that the petitioner released funds in favour of A.2 prior to entering into the agreement with the state. The leamed Advocate General further emphasized that the agreement was entered with A.2 on 15.o2.2O23 and sanction of huge amount of Rs.59,93,OOO/- on 22.O2.2O23 i.e. within a week from the date of the E- ¥Ei5= a 5 EEEEiE- 21 I/ agreement, duly misrepresenting the department, is in contravention of the agreed terms of the contract, and the same has been done without verifying the progress of work. The leamed Advocate General further emphasized that a Tender for the works of the value over and abov.e Rs.50.OO lakhs, shall be published in one Telugu and one English vernacular daily newspapers, but there were no entries regarding the publishing of the Tender Notifications in the newspapers and the Same iS in gross violation of G.O.Ms.No.94, I a CAD (PW-COD) Department, dated 01.07.2O23. He further submitted that A.3, despite being the successful bidder, failed to conduct any awareness workshops for sos/STS, and it is the Regional CID officials of the respective regions, who conducted 25 awareness workshops to SCs and STs with active co-ordination of local Police, Revenue, MPDO, Social Welfare Department officials, Colleges, SC/ST leaders and Members of the District SC/ST Vigilance monitoring committee in Government buildings, except T-rd---.-i.i-=S -9 -<-9 22 JJ at one place i.e. sneha vinayaka Function Hall, Kodumur, Kurnool district, and though A.3 has not c.onducted any of the meetings, payment of Rs.1,19,O3,6OO/-was already sanctioned in favour of A.3, purportedly for executing the work. The leamed Advocate General has also taken this Court to the photographs to the effect that the workshops were being organized by the APCID, but not by A.3. The learned Advocate General submits that though the works are not completed by A.3, certain amounts were released on different dates. He submits that this is not a case where anticipatory bail can be granted, in view of the irregularities that have been committed by the petitioner. The learned Advocate General relied on the following decisions. (I) in P.Chidambaram u. Directorate of ErLforCemerit3, wherein it is held thus: (paragraph 78) 3 .(2019) 9 SCC 24 € ---- .ex=-!€ r--i-Z--i->` 23 || tt78. Power under Section 438 CrPC being an extraordinary remedy, has to be exercised sparingly; more so, in cases of economic offences. Economic offences stand as a different class as they affect the economic fabric of the society. In Djrec€orczte o/ ErforcerrLerdV. Ashok Kumar JainlDirectorate of Enfiorcemerit v. Ashok Kumar Jcin, {L998i) 2 sic LOB : 1998 SCC (Cri) 51O] , it was held that in economic offences, the accused is not entitled to anticipatory bail.>) (rI) in Jcaya Prakash Singh u. State of Bihar & cz7tOfher,q Wherein it iS held thus: (paragraphs 13 and 22) ''13. There is no substantial difference between Sections 438 and 439 CrPC so far as appreciation of the case as to whether or not a bail is to be granted, is concerned. However, neither anticipatory bail nor regular bail can be granted as a matter of rule. The anticipatory bail being an extraordinary privilege should be granted only in exceptional cases. The judicial discretion conferred upon the court has to be properly exercised after proper application of mind to decide whether it is a fit Case for grant Of anticipatory bail. 22. In the facts and circumstances of this case, we are of the considered opinion that it was not a fit I case for grant of anticipatory bail. The High Court 4 (2012) 4 SCC 379 `=d ---`- . ,.3=--i=i±O 24 J9 ought to have exercised its extraordinary jurisdiction following the parameters laid down by this court in the abovereferred to judicial Pronouncements, considering the nature and gravity of the offence and as the FIR had been lodged spontaneously, its veracity is reliable. The High Court has very lightly brushed aside the fact that the FIR had been lodged spontaneously and further did not record any reason as to how the prerequisite conditions incorporated in the statutory provision itself stood fulfilled. Nor did the court consider as to whether custodial interrogation was required. The court may not exercise its discretion in derogation of established principles of law, rather it has to be in strict adherence to them. Discretion has to be guided by law, duly governed by rule and cannot be arbitrary, fanciful or vague. The court must not yield to spasmodic sentiment to unregulated benevolence. The order dehors the grounds provided in Section 438 CrPC itself suffers from non- application of mind and therefore, cannot be sustained in the eye of the law.'' (riI) In State, rep. bg the CBI u. Anil Shama5, wherein it is held thus: (paragraph 6) cc6. We fmd force in the submission of the CBI that custodial interrogation is qualitatively more 5 (1997) 7 SCC 187 \'--`~, _a3SSEZ- 25 f/ elicitation-oriented than questioning a suspect who is well ensconced with a favourable order under Section 438 of the Code. In a case like this effective interrogation of a suspected person is of tremendous advantage in disinterring many useful informations and also materials which would have been concealed. Success in such interrogation would elude if the suspected person knows that he. is well protected and insulated by a pre-arrest bail order during the time he is interrogated. Very often interrogation in such a condition would reduce to a mere ritual. The argument that the custodial interrogation is fraught with the danger of the person being subjected to third-degree methods need not be countenanced, for, such an argument can be advanced by all accused in all criminal cases. The Court has to presume that responsible police officers would conduct themselves J in a responsible manner and that those entrusted with the task of disinterring offences would not conduct themselves as offenders.J' (iv) in NImmagadda Prasad u. Cert±ral Bureal of froz,esfz'gcltr'o7t6, wherein it is held thus (paragraphs 23 to 26) 6 (2013) 7 SCC 466 \±--,- \ \® i- - __--------±' 26 E= cc23. Unfortunately, in the last few years, the country has been seeing an alarming rise in white- collar crimes, which has affected the fibre Of the country's economic structure. Incontrovertibly, economic offences have serious repercussions on the development of the country as a whole. In Sfa£e of Gujaratv. Mohanlal Jitamalji porwalu1987) 2 SCC 364 : 1987 SCC (Cri) 364] this Court, while considering a request of the prosecution for adducing additional evidence, inter alia, observed as under: (SCC p. 371, para 5) ¢5. ... The entire community is aggrieved if the economic offenders who ruin the economy of the State are not brought to book. A murder may be committed in the heat of moment upon passions being aroused. An economic offence is committed with cool calculation and deliberate design with an eye on personal profit regardless of the consequence to the community. A disregard for the interest of the community can be manifested only at the cost of forfeiting the trust and faith of the community in the system to administer justice in an even-handed manner without fear of criticism from the quarters which view white-collar crimes with a permissive eye unmindful of the damage done to trie national economy and national interest.» 24. While granting bail, the court has to keep in mind the nature of accusations, the nature of =T-=`>-\s+ I--EL 27 |I evidence in support thereof, the severity of the punishment which conviction will entail, the character of the accused, circumstances which are peculiar to the accused, reasonable possibility of securing the presence of the accused at the trial, reasonable apprehension of the witnesses being tampered with, the larger interests of the public/State and other similar considerations. It has also to be kept in mind that for the purpose of granting bail, the legislature has used the words areasonabl,e grourids fior belieuind' insLeed o£ "the ez,jcZerLCe'7 which means the court dealing with the grant of bail can only satisfy itself as to whether there is a genuine case against the accused and that the prosecution will be able to produce prima facie evidence in support of the charge. It is not expected, at this stage, to have the evidence establishing the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. 25. Economic offences constitute a class apart and need to be visited with a different approach in the matter of bail. The economic offence having deep- rooted conspiracies and involving huge loss of public funds needs to be viewed seriously and considered as a grave offence affecting the economy of the country as a whole and thereby posing serious threat to the financial health Of the country. EEEEEEi -±3' 28 Jr 26.Taking note of all these aspects, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and also with regard to the claim of CBI and the defence, we are of the opinion that the appellant cannot be released at this stage, however, we direct CBI to complete the investigation and fille charge- sheet(s) as early as possible preferably within a period of four months from today. Thereafter, the appellant is free to renew his prayer for bail before the trial court and if any such petition is filed, the trial court is free to consider the prayer for bail independently on its own merits without being influenced by dismissal of the present appeal.J' 12. Heard and perused the record. 13. A perusal of the record goes to show that the Chief Secretary to the Govemment of Andhra Pradesh forwarded Memo No.2592927/SC.D/ A1/2O24-3, dated o3.12.2O24 issued by the General Administration (sc-D) Department to the Director General of ACE along with detailed enquiry reports of the vigilance and Enforcement Department bearing No.62 (C.No.4828/ V&E/See.II/D1/2O24), dated 18.1O.2O24 and No.63 (C.No.4828/V&E/See-II/D1/2O24) dated 3C).1O.2O24 \`_-_ *aEir2r- 29 I? submitted by the Director General, Vigilance a Enforcement vide letaters dated 18.10.2O24 and 3O.10.2024 respectively, to the Govemment regarding certain allegations against petitioner, who worked as the Director General, A.P. State Disaster Response and Fire services and the Additional Director General, Crime Investigation Department, with a request to conduct enquiry into the allegations of misappropriation of funds by him. Thereafter, pursuant to letter dated 12.12.2024 addressed by the Director General, ACE to the Chief Secretary to the Government, the Government accorded permission Vide Memo No.2592927/SC.D/A1/2024, dated 20.12.2024 of General Administration (SC-D) Department according permission as required under Section 17A of the PC Act. 14. Thereafter, on the instructions of the Director General of ACE, vide Memo dated 24.12.2O24, to register a RCO case and to investigate into the allegations against the petitioner, the Deputy Superintendent of ri-a 30 I.rl police, CIU, ACE, Vijayawada, on a perusal of the reports submitted by the vigilance and Enforcement Department, prepared an occurrence report dated 24.12.2O24, and based on the factual aspects mentioned therein and on the orders of the Director General of ACE, AP, Vijayawada dated 24.12.2O24, the aforesaid crime came to be registered against the petitioner herein and others. 15. The accusation as against the petitioner is that he is alleged to have actively connived with others in manipulating tender processes for awarding the contract work of Development and Maintenance of AGNI-NOC (Automated govemance a NOC Integration) web portal, Mobile App and supply of hardware to A.2 in violation of the procedure in vogue leading to misappropriation of Govemment funds to a tune of about Rs.59,93,OOO/- and the contract of conducting awareriess meetings/ workshops for sos/sTs on the sc/sT PoA Act to A.3 by showing undue favour to the firms Of his Choice. It is + ~--.i L`` 31 r/ further alleged that A.3 is a non-existent company leading to misappropriation of Govemment funds to a tune of about Rs.1,53,93,6OO/-, resorting to corrupt and illegal means not adhering to the procedures in vogue, nonfeasance in initiating action against A.2, though they failed to show much of progress in the development of AGNI-NOC portal. 16. A perusal of the material placed on record goes to show that when a Tender Notification Vide RC No.3776/Planning/2O15/NOC, dated O6.01.2O23 was issued for Development and Maintenance of AGNI-NOC Web portal for a period of five years and mobile app and supply of hardware for APSDRFS, A.2 and others are said to have participated in the tender process and A.2 was declared as successful bidder for an amount of Rs.2,29,61,OOO/-. The price bid was opened on 25.01.2O23 and the Committee constituted for Tender Finalization was met on 25.O1.2O23, and the tender was accepted on negotiations. Thereafter, the said fact was `-- .--._3 i _,7=-. ¢ i---- sa 32 + informed to the successful bidder with a request to enter into agreement within a period of 7 days. The allegation is that the petitioner, in violation of the procedures in vogue and dishonestly and fraudulently facilitated Payment of Rs.59,93,000/- to the said firm on 22.O2.2O23 i.e. within one week after entering into agreement on 15.O2.2O23, though there was no much Progress in the development of AGNI-NOC portal. 17. It is pertinent to mention here that the petitioner worked as the Director General of APSDRFS, and he, being the Head of the Institution, a supervising Authority, is said to have accepted the entire process as suggested by the officers concerned. A plain reading of the material on record with regard to the disbursement of amounts, it is alleged that there appear to be some procedural violations. Merely because there are certain procedural violations, the petitioner cannot be made liable therefor. In connection with the said averment, the petitioner followed the procedure as contemplated. _.I,55€ €`-ed ly ~--`1 33 JF, Merely because the amounts have been released in favour of companies for the works completed by them, it would not come within the purview of the offence punishable under Section 4O9 IPC. 18. In respect of another Tender Notification No.97O7/D1/CID/2O24, dated ll.O1.2O24, it was issued for conducting awareness programmes for sos/STs, which include providing refreshments/venues/vc halls and workshop material. A.3 is said to have declared as lowest bidder, and after complying with all the formalities, A.3 was declared as the successful bidder vide proceedings dated 19.01.2O24 for a sum of Rs.59,52,50O/-and Rs.59,51,loo/-respectively towards SCs awareness workshops and STs awareness workshops. In connection with that, an agreement was entered into, for carrying out the workshops. 19. It is alleged that Awareness Prograngmes were shovIl tO be COnduCted On 27.O1.2O24, 28.01.2024 and 29.01.2O24, even before entering of agreement with A.3 EL-- ,~ T=f-ff? 34 Jr, on 3O.O1.2O24, and petitioner sanctioned an amount of Rs.59,52,500/-and Rs.59,51,loo/-respectively towards sos a sTs Awareness workshops on the same date of the agreement on 3O.O1.2O24, and that only Rs.3,1O,OOO/-was incurred against the agreement value of Rs.1,19,O3,6OO/-which indicates gross embezzlement o.f govemment funds to a tune of Rs.1,15,93,6OO/-. The learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that though the agreement was entered into at a belated stage, it is agreed upon that the work would commence from the date of the purchase order. According to the leamed senior counsel, work commenced much earlier and the awareness camps for SCs and sTs were successfully conducted, and the officer concerned has also given certificate of satisfactory. As far as the Awareness workshops are concerned, the same were managed by the Regional Officers in the cadre of Superintendent or Additional Superintendent of police, and basing on their feed back and on the recommendation of all the concemed, the EE-i== 35 I, amounts were paid under the said Head. It is also relevant to mention here that the petitioner is not a Drawing and Disbursing Officer. It is submitted that the Drawing and Disbursing Officer certified that the work performed by the companies are found to be satisfactory and thereafter the amounts were released. 20. It is further alleged that the petitioner/A.1, while working as the Director General of APSDRFS, violated G.O.Ms.No.258, F`inance (TF`R) Department, dated 20.O9.2O13 with a mclZcl ficZe intention and in connivance with A.2 in procuring lO Nos. 1aptops at an exorbitant price of Rs.17,89,784/-i.e. Rs.1,78,978/-per each laptop, without calling for tenders. It is further alleged that the petitioner failed to discharge his legitimate duties deliberately in sanctioning the abovesaid amount. A perusal of the material on record goes to show that the sanction of Rs.17,89,784/-to procure lO Nos. laptops was ratified by the Welfare committee of A.P. Fire Services (Petroleum Retail ±' 36 ~7 outlets), Krishna District in its meeting dated 10.O2.2O23. It goes to show that the said laptops were supplied by A.2 for rate 5% less than the market value. It is not the case of prosecution that the laptops were not at all procured. But, it is the averment in the First Information Report that the same has not been done through tender process. It is not the case of the prosecution that laptops are not being used by the Department and the same are not in working conditions. Being the Head of the Institution, the petitioner is said to have taken a collective decision along with other senior officials to procure the laptops at a rate less than 5O/o of the market price. It appears that the said laptops are necessary for effective development of the said application by the superior officers Of the Fire Department and several other subordinates, since the same were launched formally. It is the submission of the learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner that various price quotations and queries in terms of quick delivery were taken from different vendors by the }=~ - __ _fu-} -rife-`_ L- 37 // Department and as A.2 company quoted less price than the price quoted by other vendors, the work of supplying the said laptops was entrusted by the Department to A.2 company. on a perusal of the entire material on record, this Court is of the opinion that there are certain procedural violations in respect of monies that have been released in favour of the companies by verifying the progress of work done by the companies. It is for those officers COnCerned tO look into the aspects and submit ®a report to the Head of the Institution. The Head of the Institution, being the Supervisory Authority, would not in any way go into each and every aspect in detail in order to release funds in favour of the companies. 21. Section 409 IPC deals with the criminal breach of trust by a public servant or a banker in respect of the property entrusted to him. Under Section 4O5 IPC, whoever, being in any manner, entrusted with property, or with any dominion over property, dishonestly misappropriates or converts to his olm use +T=--3 = rS ET=EE=L € -.- 38 ~/ that property, or dishonestly uses or disposes of that property in violation of any direction of law prescribing the mode in which such trust is to be discharged, or of any legal contract, express or implied, which he has made touching the discharge of such trust, or wilfully suffers any person so to do, commits tcriminal breach of trust'. In order to constitute the aforesaid offence, there must be an entrustment of property or dominion over the Property, and the said person entrusted has to dishonestly misappropriate or convert it to his our use. The onus is on the prosecution to prove that the accused, being a public servant or a banker, was entrusted with the property which he is duty bound to account for, and that he committed criminal breach of trust. 22. Going by the averments contained in the First Information Report, there is absolutely no doubt that the petitioner is a public servant. In Common cclzJSeJs case (2 supra), a discussion has cropped up with regard to | +-_- --` 39 fr tentrustment of property' and with any dominion over property', used in Section 4O5 IPC, which came to be considered by the Honble Apex Court in CBJ I,. DtJ7tCCmS Agro J71CZzJStJieS LjJ"'feC! {(1996) 5 SCC 591}, wherein it is held that the expression tentrustedJ has wide and different implication in different contexts and the express ttrust' has been used to denote various kinds of relationships like trustee and beneficiary, bailor and bailee, master and servant, pledger and pledgee, and it was held that mere exercise of cpower to allotj cannot be treated as tproperty' within the meaning of Section 4O5 IPC, capable of being mis-utilized or misappropriated. 23. In the case on hand too, the work has been allotted to A.2 and A.3 after following due procedure contemplated as per Rules. Merely because .certain procedural violations alleged have taken place with regard to disbursement of amounts in favour of the companies, p7imCl /Clcte, would not in any way come within the purview of Section 4O9 IPC. In view of the I--aJ -~ c-` // aforesaid judgment, it can be inferred that mere power to allot the work to other companies, would not in any way come within the purview of entrustment of property. 24. Apart from the same, it is also essential that the property which has been entrusted must have been misappropriated and the same has been converted for personal use. In the case on hand, there is absolutely no material to show that the property or any monies has been misappropriated and the same has been converted for the personal use of the petitioner. In the absence of the said ingredients, there is any amount of ambiguity whether the offence punishable under section 4O9 IPC would attract or not. 25. The leamed Advocate General, by placing reliance on the decision in sfclfe, rep. bg €he CBJ I,. Am'Z Shclmcl (5 supra), strenuously contended that in order to Prove that the funds have been misappropriated and the same were converted for the personal use of the petitioner, custodial interrogation is essential, and that i}-a.-i= .` t-+ •,-H 41 J} custodial interrogation is qualitatively more elicitation- oriented than questioning a suspect who is well ensconced with a favourable order under Section 438 CrPC. He further emphasized that in a case of this nature, effective interrogation of the suspected person is of tremendous advantage in disinterring useful information and also materials which would have been concealed. 26. In the case on hand, the petitioner is an Ips officer, entered into Service in the year 1996. He has been suspended from service in June, 2O24. Entire material that is borne out of record, has been seized by the Vigilance and Enforcement Department and the same has been furnished to ACE officials. The petitioner is under suspension since June, 2024 and question of tampering with the evidence by him would not arise at all. When the entire material pertaining to the alleged transactions has been seized, question of custodial interrogation to elicit more information, would not arise. _\ _I.--` TEE-I 42 I/ It is pertinent to mention here that if the petitioner is arrested and if the prosecution is not able to prove the accusation of misappropriation and funds that were converted for his personal use, as alleged, reputation of the petitioner will be mollified. 27. The Honble Apex Court, ins1'CZcZhcz7lClm SclfZ1'7tgapPa n47tefre case reported in (2O11) 1 SCC 694, laid down certain factors and parameters to be considered while considering an application for anticipatory bail, which read as under : «JJ2. The following factors and parameters can be taken into consideration while dealing with the anticipatory bail: (,) the nature and gravity of the accusation and the exact role of the accused must be properly comprehended before arrest is made; (Ill) 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; (£I'I) the POSSibility of the applicant to flee from justice; E-iiiffi E _2 43 I/ (lou) the POSSibility Of the aCCuSed'S likelihood to repeat similar or [the] other offences; (I,) where the accusations have been made only with the object of injuring or humiliating the applicant by arresting him or her; (I,I) impact of grant of anticipatory bail particularly in cases of large magnitude affecting a very large number of people; (u!',) 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 the accused is implicated with the help of Sections 34 and 149 of the Penal Code, 186O the court should consider with even greater care and caution because overimplication in the cases is a matter of common knowledge and concern; (a,l®jt) While considering the prayer for grant of anticipatory ball, 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 ; (de) the court to consider reasonable apprehension of tampering of the witness or apprehension of threat to the complainant; ~ ±Ta _ -----i 44 r/ (jx:) frivolity in p1-OSeCutiOn 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 e`,-ent 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. JJ3. Arrest should be the last option and it should be restricted to those exceptional cases where arresting the accused is imperative in the facts and circumstances of that case. The court must carefully examine the entire available record and particularly the allegations which have been directly attributed to the accused and these allegations are corroborated by other material and circumstances on record.jJ 28. This Court is of the view that the petitioner, being an Ips officer, WOrked in the capacities as the Director General, A.P. State Disaster Response and Fire Services and the Additional Director General, Crime Investigation Department, question of he fleeing away is remote. There is absolutely no flight risk. He has got fixed abode. He is aged about 57 years. The material flled along with the petition shows that petitioner is a \ :--`-=-. tar? (sat-I 45 *rJ cardiac patient, diagnosed with coronary artery disease, specifically triple vessel disease, and he underwent a coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) in July, 2023, and considering the severity, he- requires continuous follow up with his physician to monitor his recovery and overall health. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, this Court feels that the request of the petitioner for anticipatory ball can be considered, however, on certain conditions. 29. Accordingly, in the event of his arrest in the aforesaid crime, the petitioner shall be released on bail on his executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.25,00O/- with two sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting officials. The petitioner shall co-operate with the investigating agency and attend before it as and when required. The petitioner shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the \._----. 46 I/ case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police oI-fleer. 30. Accordingly, the criminal Petition is allowed. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, in the Criminal Petition shall stand closed. •To , //TRUE COPY// F sD/-U.SRI DEV!- ASSISTANT REGISTRAR &!t===:_ SECTION OFFICER 1. The Deputy superl'ntendent of polI|Ce, Anti-Corruption Bureau, central InvestigatI'On Unit, AP, Vl'jayawada 2 The statl'on House officer, clu, ACB, AP, Vl'J-ayawada, lbrahjmpatnam 3. One cc to sRl. S DUSHYANTH REDDYAdvocate [opuc] 4. Two cos to PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, High court of Andhra pradesh [OUT] 5. One spare copy PSR .r` res HIGH COURT SRK,J DATED : 30/01 /2025 ANTICIPATORY BAIL ORDER CRLP.No.58 of 2025 ALLOWED _ _ -.--`--I,-``.. ` I.`i=`sT`t+