CRM-M- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT 101-2 Rohtash @ Rohit Sharma State of Haryana CORAM: Present: SUMEET GOEL 1. grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No. 07.02.2023 Haryana Protection of Interest of Depositors in Financial Establishment Act, 2013 (added later on) Kurukshetra. 2. -20308-2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Rohtash @ Rohit Sharma V/s State of Haryana CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Mr. Neeraj Jain, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Tarun Aggarwal, Additional Advocate General, Haryana. Mr. R.K. Samyal, Advocate for the complainant. ***** SUMEET GOEL, J. (Oral) Present petition has been filed under Section grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No. 07.02.2023, under Sections 406, 420 and 120 Haryana Protection of Interest of Depositors in Financial Establishment Act, 2013 (added later on) registered at Police Station Kurukshetra. On 25.04.2023, the following order was passed: “Present petition has been filed under Section 438 of CEPC praying for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case bearing FIR No 0080 dated 07.02.2023 registered under Sections 406, 420, 120 the Indian Penal Code and Section 3 of Haryana Prot Depositors in Financial Establishment Act, 2013 Police Station Thanesan Sadar. District Kurukshetra Learned counsel for the petitioner been falsely implicated in the present case as with the present FIR. Learned counsel further contends that a total amount of Rs.7,27,700/- (Rs.2,27,700+5,00,000/ received in the petitioner’s account on behalf of Ankur Mittal, on 04.02.2022, which has been state amount, which belongs to one Rahul, after 2 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-20308-2023 Date of decision: 08.09.202 ....Petitioner ....Respondent HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Mr. Neeraj Jain, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Tarun Aggarwal, Additional Advocate General, Haryana. Mr. R.K. Samyal, Advocate for the complainant. Present petition has been filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.80 dated 406, 420 and 120-B of IPC and Section 3 of the Haryana Protection of Interest of Depositors in Financial Establishment Act, registered at Police Station Thanesar Sadar, District the following order was passed:- Present petition has been filed under Section 438 of CEPC praying for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case bearing FIR No 0080 dated 07.02.2023 registered under Sections 406, 420, 120-B of Section 3 of Haryana Protection of Interest of Depositors in Financial Establishment Act, 2013 (added later on) at Police Station Thanesan Sadar. District Kurukshetra. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case as he is nowhere connected with the present FIR. Learned counsel further contends that a total (Rs.2,27,700+5,00,000/-) was admittedly received in the petitioner’s account on behalf of Ankur Mittal, on 04.02.2022, which has been stated to be refunded back to the same amount, which belongs to one Rahul, after 2-3 days of the said .2025 Mr. Tarun Aggarwal, Additional Advocate General, Haryana. for dated and Section 3 of the Haryana Protection of Interest of Depositors in Financial Establishment Act, Thanesar Sadar, District Present petition has been filed under Section 438 of CEPC praying for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case bearing FIR B of ection of Interest of added later on) at contends that petitioner has he is nowhere connected with the present FIR. Learned counsel further contends that a total ) was admittedly received in the petitioner’s account on behalf of Ankur Mittal, on d to be refunded back to the same 3 days of the said AJAY KUMAR 2025.09.09 13:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- 3. the connected case i.e. CRM -20308-2023 transaction. Learned counsel further contends that Shilpa Mittal i.e. wife of Ankur Mittal, who’s account details were mentioned in the FIR has been granted interim anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 13.03.2023 passed in CRM-M-11253 submits that nothing is to be recovered from the petitioner and he is ready to join the investigation. Notice of motion. Mr. Karan Garg, AAG Haryana, who is present in the Court, accepts notice on the asking of the Court and seeks time to file reply/status report. Adjourned to 18.05.2023. Meanwhile, arrest of the petitioner shall remain stayed, till the next date of hearing.” Thereafter, on 22.05.2024, the following order was passed in the connected case i.e. CRM-27224-2023: “On 31.05.2023, a Coordinate Bench of this Court, while issuing notice of motion. had noticed the following submissions made by the learned Senior counsel appearing for the petitioner: “Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the alleged payments have been duly transferred in the accounts of the complainants.” Thereafter, on 02.06.2023, it was ordered that no coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioner. At the outset, learned State counsel, on instructions from ASI Surinder, has informed the Court that the FIR in question was registered at the instance of complainant-Sohan Lal. The complainant had explicitly stated in his statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. that he had transferred Rs.10 lakhs to the petitioners through bank transactions, which amount has since been r transactions. When a pointed query was put to the learned State counsel about the total amount transferred to the petitioners via bank transactions, the learned State counsel, on instructions, informed the Court that as per the complainant- Sohan Lal, amount to the tune had been transferred through the bank. The remaining amount of approximately Rs.97 lakhs had been allegedly given to the accused in cash. Learned State counsel has submitted that on the previous date of 2 transaction. Learned counsel further contends that Shilpa Mittal i.e. wife of Ankur Mittal, who’s account details were mentioned in the FIR has nterim anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 11253-2023. Learned counsel further submits that nothing is to be recovered from the petitioner and he is ready Garg, AAG Haryana, who is present in the Court, accepts notice on the asking of the Court and seeks time to file Meanwhile, arrest of the petitioner shall remain stayed, till the Thereafter, on 22.05.2024, the following order was passed in 2023: On 31.05.2023, a Coordinate Bench of this Court, while issuing notice of motion. had noticed the following submissions made by the sel appearing for the petitioner: - Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the alleged payments have been duly transferred in the accounts of the Thereafter, on 02.06.2023, it was ordered that no coercive steps ainst the petitioner. At the outset, learned State counsel, on instructions from ASI Surinder, has informed the Court that the FIR in question was registered Sohan Lal. The complainant-Sohan Lal statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. that he akhs to the petitioners through bank transactions, returned to him and that too, via bank When a pointed query was put to the learned State counsel about the total amount transferred to the petitioners via bank transactions, the learned State counsel, on instructions, informed the Court that as per the Sohan Lal, amount to the tune of approximately Rs.10 lakhs had been transferred through the bank. The remaining amount of approximately Rs.97 lakhs had been allegedly given to the accused in cash. Learned State counsel has submitted that on the previous date of transaction. Learned counsel further contends that Shilpa Mittal i.e. wife of Ankur Mittal, who’s account details were mentioned in the FIR has nterim anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 2023. Learned counsel further submits that nothing is to be recovered from the petitioner and he is ready Garg, AAG Haryana, who is present in the Court, accepts notice on the asking of the Court and seeks time to file Meanwhile, arrest of the petitioner shall remain stayed, till the Thereafter, on 22.05.2024, the following order was passed in On 31.05.2023, a Coordinate Bench of this Court, while issuing notice of motion. had noticed the following submissions made by the Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the alleged payments have been duly transferred in the accounts of the Thereafter, on 02.06.2023, it was ordered that no coercive steps At the outset, learned State counsel, on instructions from ASI Surinder, has informed the Court that the FIR in question was registered Sohan Lal statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. that he akhs to the petitioners through bank transactions, eturned to him and that too, via bank When a pointed query was put to the learned State counsel about the total amount transferred to the petitioners via bank transactions, the learned State counsel, on instructions, informed the Court that as per the of approximately Rs.10 lakhs had been transferred through the bank. The remaining amount of approximately Rs.97 lakhs had been allegedly given to the accused in cash. Learned State counsel has submitted that on the previous date of AJAY KUMAR 2025.09.09 13:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- -20308-2023 hearing i.e. 02.05.2024, it had been erroneously noted that an amount of Rs. 47 lakhs, in addition to Rs.2 crores, was paid in cash to the accused. Learned State counsel has further submitted that as on date, since all the amount transacted through bank transactions had been r back to the complainant in the FIR, the petitioner be directed to join investigation. Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner, in the light of the undertaking given on the last date of hearing, has brought cheques totalling a sum of Rs.47,87,533/ deposited various sums of money into the account of the petitioners. However, there is no representation on behalf of those persons. Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner has also reiterated that the entire amoun of money, which had been allegedly paid by the complainant to the petitioner, already stands returned to him. Learned counsel for the complainant has, however, vehemently opposed the prayer and submissions made by the counsel opposite by drawing the attention of this Court to the serious allegations levelled against the petitioner. It has been argued that the petitioner had duped many people of crores of rupees and hence, his custodial interrogation was necessitated as recovery of huge amount of money w On a pointed query put to the learned counsel for the complainant as to the total amount paid through bank transactions, he was not able to refute that the total amount through bank transactions was indeed Rs.10 lakhs However, he has asserted that the amount which had been cash to the petitioners, was running into crores and that also required to be recovered He also argued that other than Sohan Lal, there were similarly aggrieved persons, who had been duped by the petitioners. When a query in the said regard was directed towards the learned State counsel, she, on instructions, submitted that in the present FIR, there was only one complainant i.e. Sohan Lal, however, subsequently, certain complaints from other persons have also be the investigating agency is looking into them and if required appropriate action in accordance with law. Adjourned to 27.08.2024. Meanwhile, the petitioner is directed to join the investigation and appear before the investigating agency, as and when called upon to do so. In the event of his arrest, he shall be admitted to interim bail on his furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the Arresting/Investigating 3 , it had been erroneously noted that an amount of Rs. 47 lakhs, in addition to Rs.2 crores, was paid in cash to the accused. Learned State counsel has further submitted that as on date, since all the amount transacted through bank transactions had been returned back to the complainant in the FIR, the petitioner be directed to join Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner, in the light of the undertaking given on the last date of hearing, has brought cheques 3/- in the name of the persons, who had deposited various sums of money into the account of the petitioners. However, there is no representation on behalf of those persons. Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner has also reiterated that the entire amoun of money, which had been allegedly paid by the complainant to the petitioner, already stands returned to him. Learned counsel for the complainant has, however, vehemently opposed the prayer and submissions made by the counsel opposite by tention of this Court to the serious allegations levelled against the petitioner. It has been argued that the petitioner had duped many people of crores of rupees and hence, his custodial interrogation was necessitated as recovery of huge amount of money was to be done. On a pointed query put to the learned counsel for the complainant as to the total amount paid through bank transactions, he was not able to refute that the total amount through bank transactions was indeed Rs.10 ted that the amount which had been paid in petitioners, was running into crores and that also required to be recovered He also argued that other than Sohan Lal, there were similarly aggrieved persons, who had been duped by the petitioners. hen a query in the said regard was directed towards the learned State counsel, she, on instructions, submitted that in the present FIR, there was only one complainant i.e. Sohan Lal, however, subsequently, certain complaints from other persons have also beer also been received; the investigating agency is looking into them and if required, would take appropriate action in accordance with law. Meanwhile, the petitioner is directed to join the investigation and nvestigating agency, as and when called upon to do so. In the event of his arrest, he shall be admitted to interim bail on his furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the Arresting/Investigating , it had been erroneously noted that an amount of Rs. 47 lakhs, in addition to Rs.2 crores, was paid in cash to the accused. Learned State counsel has further submitted that as on date, since eturned back to the complainant in the FIR, the petitioner be directed to join Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner, in the light of the undertaking given on the last date of hearing, has brought cheques in the name of the persons, who had deposited various sums of money into the account of the petitioners. However, there is no representation on behalf of those persons. Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner has also reiterated that the entire amount of money, which had been allegedly paid by the complainant to the Learned counsel for the complainant has, however, vehemently opposed the prayer and submissions made by the counsel opposite by tention of this Court to the serious allegations levelled against the petitioner. It has been argued that the petitioner had duped many people of crores of rupees and hence, his custodial interrogation On a pointed query put to the learned counsel for the complainant as to the total amount paid through bank transactions, he was not able to refute that the total amount through bank transactions was indeed Rs.10 paid in petitioners, was running into crores and that also required to be recovered He also argued that other than Sohan Lal, there were hen a query in the said regard was directed towards the learned State counsel, she, on instructions, submitted that in the present FIR, there was only one complainant i.e. Sohan Lal, however, subsequently, er also been received; would take Meanwhile, the petitioner is directed to join the investigation and nvestigating agency, as and when called upon to do so. In the event of his arrest, he shall be admitted to interim bail on his furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the Arresting/Investigating AJAY KUMAR 2025.09.09 13:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- 4. petitioner has been falsely implicated into the present case as he has no connection whatsoever with the allegations mentioned in the FIR. Learned counsel has further contended that the involvement of the petitioner is only being presumed on account of a financial transaction which in fact was carried out on behalf of co pointed out that the amount which was credited into the bank account of the petitioner on 04.02.2022 was not retained by the petitioner and the entire amount was duly refunded to the same account belonging to one Rahul 2/3 days of the transactions. Learned counsel has further contended that neither there is intention attributable to the petitioner and therefore, continuation of the proceedings against him is an aforesaid submission, the grant of instant petition is entreated for. 5. to the order has joined investigation petition by arguing that allegations against the petitioner are serious in nature. However, it is not the case of the State that the petitioner has misused the said concessi 6. grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner by arguing that the allegations -20308-2023 Officer. The petitioner shall abide by the terms and con envisaged under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. Photocopy of this order be placed on the file of the connected case.” Learned counsel for the petitioner has petitioner has been falsely implicated into the present case as he has no connection whatsoever with the allegations mentioned in the FIR. Learned counsel has further contended that the involvement of the petitioner is only being presumed on account of a financial transaction which in fact was carried out on behalf of co-accused Ankur Mittal. Learned counsel has pointed out that the amount which was credited into the bank account of the petitioner on 04.02.2022 was not retained by the petitioner and the entire amount was duly refunded to the same account belonging to one Rahul 2/3 days of the transactions. Learned counsel has further contended that there is any wrongful gain to the petitioner nor any dishonest intention attributable to the petitioner and therefore, continuation of the proceedings against him is an abuse of process of law. aforesaid submission, the grant of instant petition is entreated for. Learned State counsel, on instructions to the orders dated 25.04.2023 and 22.05.2024 respectively has joined investigation. He has, however, opposed the grant of instant petition by arguing that allegations against the petitioner are serious in However, it is not the case of the State that the petitioner has misused the said concession. Learned counsel appearing for complainant has opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner by arguing that the allegations 4 Officer. The petitioner shall abide by the terms and conditions as envisaged under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. Photocopy of this order be placed on the file of the connected Learned counsel for the petitioner has iterated that the petitioner has been falsely implicated into the present case as he has no connection whatsoever with the allegations mentioned in the FIR. Learned counsel has further contended that the involvement of the petitioner is only being presumed on account of a financial transaction which in fact was d Ankur Mittal. Learned counsel has pointed out that the amount which was credited into the bank account of the petitioner on 04.02.2022 was not retained by the petitioner and the entire amount was duly refunded to the same account belonging to one Rahul after 2/3 days of the transactions. Learned counsel has further contended that wrongful gain to the petitioner nor any dishonest intention attributable to the petitioner and therefore, continuation of the abuse of process of law. On the basis of aforesaid submission, the grant of instant petition is entreated for. Learned State counsel, on instructions, has stated that pursuant and 22.05.2024 respectively, the petitioner He has, however, opposed the grant of instant petition by arguing that allegations against the petitioner are serious in However, it is not the case of the State that the petitioner has Learned counsel appearing for complainant has opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner by arguing that the allegations ditions as Photocopy of this order be placed on the file of the connected iterated that the petitioner has been falsely implicated into the present case as he has no connection whatsoever with the allegations mentioned in the FIR. Learned counsel has further contended that the involvement of the petitioner is only being presumed on account of a financial transaction which in fact was d Ankur Mittal. Learned counsel has pointed out that the amount which was credited into the bank account of the petitioner on 04.02.2022 was not retained by the petitioner and the entire after 2/3 days of the transactions. Learned counsel has further contended that wrongful gain to the petitioner nor any dishonest intention attributable to the petitioner and therefore, continuation of the On the basis of has stated that pursuant petitioner He has, however, opposed the grant of instant petition by arguing that allegations against the petitioner are serious in However, it is not the case of the State that the petitioner has Learned counsel appearing for complainant has opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner by arguing that the allegations AJAY KUMAR 2025.09.09 13:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- made against the petitioner are serious in nature as he has duped many innocent people of large amount of money that receipt of money in Bank account of petitioner shows his direct involvement and complicity with co prayed that the petitioner ought not be extended the concession of anticipatory ba 7. the record. 8. Hon’ble Supreme Court titled as Yashwant Patil and another whereof reads as under: -20308-2023 made against the petitioner are serious in nature as he has duped many innocent people of large amount of money that receipt of money in Bank account of petitioner shows his direct involvement and complicity with co-accused Ankur Mittal. prayed that the petitioner ought not be extended the concession of anticipatory bail. I have heard learned counsel for the rival parties and perused the record. It would be apposite to refer herein to a judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court titled as Kishor Vishwasrao Patil vs. Deepak Yashwant Patil and another passed in whereof reads as under: “74. Ordinarily, arrest is a part of the process of the investigation intended to secure several purposes. There may be circumstances in which the accused may provide information leading to discover material facts and relevant information. Grant of anticipatory bail may hamper the investigation. Pre-arrest bail is to strike a balance between the individual's right to personal freedom and the right of the investigating agency to interrogate the ac collected and to collect more information which may lead to recovery of relevant information. xxx xxx xxx xxx 75. Observing that the arrest is a part of the investigation intended to secure several purposes, in Adri Dharan Das v. State of W.B. [Adri Dharan Das v. State of W.B., (2005) 4 SCC 303 : 2005 SCC (Cri) 933] it was held as under : (SCC p. 313, para 19) “19. Ordinarily, arrest is a part of the process of investigation intended to secure several purposes. The accused may have to be questioned in detail regarding various facets of motive, preparation, commission and aftermath of the crime and the connection of other persons, if any, in the crime. There may be circumstances in which the 5 made against the petitioner are serious in nature as he has duped many innocent people of large amount of money. It has been further contended that receipt of money in Bank account of petitioner shows his direct accused Ankur Mittal. Hence, he has prayed that the petitioner ought not be extended the concession of I have heard learned counsel for the rival parties and perused It would be apposite to refer herein to a judgment of the Kishor Vishwasrao Patil vs. Deepak SLP(Crl) No.1125-2022, relevant “74. Ordinarily, arrest is a part of the process of the investigation intended to secure several purposes. There may be circumstances in which the accused may provide information leading to discovery of material facts and relevant information. Grant of anticipatory bail may arrest bail is to strike a balance between the individual's right to personal freedom and the right of the investigating agency to interrogate the accused as to the material so far collected and to collect more information which may lead to recovery of xxx xxx xxx xxx 75. Observing that the arrest is a part of the investigation intended to Adri Dharan Das v. State of W.B. [Adri Dharan Das v. State of W.B., (2005) 4 SCC 303 : 2005 SCC (Cri) 933] it was held as under : (SCC p. 313, para 19) “19. Ordinarily, arrest is a part of the process of investigation intended to ure several purposes. The accused may have to be questioned in detail regarding various facets of motive, preparation, commission and aftermath of the crime and the connection of other persons, if any, in the crime. There may be circumstances in which the accused may provide made against the petitioner are serious in nature as he has duped many It has been further contended that receipt of money in Bank account of petitioner shows his direct Hence, he has prayed that the petitioner ought not be extended the concession of I have heard learned counsel for the rival parties and perused It would be apposite to refer herein to a judgment of the Kishor Vishwasrao Patil vs. Deepak relevant “74. Ordinarily, arrest is a part of the process of the investigation intended to secure several purposes. There may be circumstances in y of material facts and relevant information. Grant of anticipatory bail may arrest bail is to strike a balance between the individual's right to personal freedom and the right of the cused as to the material so far collected and to collect more information which may lead to recovery of 75. Observing that the arrest is a part of the investigation intended to Adri Dharan Das v. State of W.B. [Adri Dharan Das v. State of W.B., (2005) 4 SCC 303 : 2005 SCC (Cri) 933] , “19. Ordinarily, arrest is a part of the process of investigation intended to ure several purposes. The accused may have to be questioned in detail regarding various facets of motive, preparation, commission and aftermath of the crime and the connection of other persons, if any, in the accused may provide AJAY KUMAR 2025.09.09 13:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- -20308-2023 information leading to discovery of material facts. It may be necessary to curtail his freedom in order to enable the investigation to proceed without hindrance and to protect witnesses and persons connected with the victim of the crime, to prevent his disappearance, to maintain law and order in the locality. For these or other reasons, part of the process of investigation. The legality of the proposed arrest cannot be gone into in an application under role of the investigator is well defined and the jurisdictional scope of interference by the court in the process of investigation is limited. The court ordinarily will not interfere with the investigation of a crime or with the arrest of the accused in a cognizable offence. An interim order restraining arrest, if passed while dealing with an application under Section 438 of the Code will amount to interference in the investigation, which cannot, at any rate, be done under Code.” 76. In Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra [Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra, (2011) 1 SCC 694 : (2011) 1 SCC (Cri) 514], the Supreme Court laid down the factors and parameters to be considered while dealing with anticipatory bail. It was held that the nature and the gravity of role of the accused must be properly comprehended before arrest is made and that the court must evaluate the available material against the accused very carefully. It was also held that the court should also consider whether the accusations have been made only with the object of injuring or humiliating the applicant by arresting him or her. 77. After referring to Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra (2011) 1 SCC (Cri) 514] and other judgments and observing that anticipatory bail can be granted only in exceptional circumstances, in Prakash Singh v. State of Bihar [Jai Prakash Singh (2012) 4 SCC 379 : (2012) 2 SCC (Cri) 468] under : (SCC p. 386, para 19) “19. Parameters for grant of anticipatory bail in a serious offence are required to be satisfied and further must record the reasons therefor. Anticipatory bail can be granted only in exceptional circumstances where the court is prima facie of the view that the applicant has falsely been enroped in the crime and would not mi his liberty. (See D.K. Ganesh Babu v. P.T. Manokaran [D.K. Ganesh Babu v. P.T. Manokaran, (2007) 4 SCC 434 :(2007) 2 SCC (Cri) 345] , 6 information leading to discovery of material facts. It may be necessary to curtail his freedom in order to enable the investigation to proceed without hindrance and to protect witnesses and persons connected with the victim , to prevent his disappearance, to maintain law and order in the locality. For these or other reasons, arrest may become an inevitable part of the process of investigation. The legality of the proposed arrest in an application under Section 438 of the Code. The role of the investigator is well defined and the jurisdictional scope of interference by the court in the process of investigation is limited. The fere with the investigation of a crime or with the arrest of the accused in a cognizable offence. An interim order restraining arrest, if passed while dealing with an application Code will amount to interference in the investigation, which cannot, at any rate, be done under Section 438 of the Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra [Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra, (2011) 1 SCC , the Supreme Court laid down the factors and parameters to be considered while dealing with anticipatory bail. It was held that the nature and the gravity of the accusation and the exact role of the accused must be properly comprehended before arrest is made and that the court must evaluate the available material against the accused very carefully. It was also held that the court should also he accusations have been made only with the object of injuring or humiliating the applicant by arresting him or her. Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre [Siddharam tate of Maharashtra, (2011) 1 SCC 694 : and other judgments and observing that anticipatory bail can be granted only in exceptional circumstances, in Bihar [Jai Prakash Singh v. State of Bihar, (2012) 4 SCC 379 : (2012) 2 SCC (Cri) 468] , the Supreme Court held as “19. Parameters for grant of anticipatory bail in a serious offence are required to be satisfied and further while granting such relief, the court must record the reasons therefor. Anticipatory bail can be granted only in exceptional circumstances where the court is prima facie of the view that the applicant has falsely been enroped in the crime and would not misuse D.K. Ganesh Babu v. P.T. Manokaran [D.K. Ganesh v. P.T. Manokaran, (2007) 4 SCC 434 :(2007) 2 SCC (Cri) 345] , information leading to discovery of material facts. It may be necessary to curtail his freedom in order to enable the investigation to proceed without hindrance and to protect witnesses and persons connected with the victim , to prevent his disappearance, to maintain law and order in arrest may become an inevitable part of the process of investigation. The legality of the proposed arrest of the Code. The role of the investigator is well defined and the jurisdictional scope of interference by the court in the process of investigation is limited. The fere with the investigation of a crime or with the arrest of the accused in a cognizable offence. An interim order restraining arrest, if passed while dealing with an application Code will amount to interference in the of the Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra [Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra, (2011) 1 SCC , the Supreme Court laid down the factors and parameters to be considered while dealing with anticipatory bail. It the accusation and the exact role of the accused must be properly comprehended before arrest is made and that the court must evaluate the available material against the accused very carefully. It was also held that the court should also he accusations have been made only with the object of [Siddharam , (2011) 1 SCC 694 : and other judgments and observing that Jai v. State of Bihar, , the Supreme Court held as “19. Parameters for grant of anticipatory bail in a serious offence are while granting such relief, the court must record the reasons therefor. Anticipatory bail can be granted only in exceptional circumstances where the court is prima facie of the view that suse D.K. Ganesh Babu v. P.T. Manokaran [D.K. Ganesh v. P.T. Manokaran, (2007) 4 SCC 434 :(2007) 2 SCC (Cri) 345] , AJAY KUMAR 2025.09.09 13:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- 9. to personal liberty enshrined under the Constitution and any adjudication in this regard must necessarily be undertaken in the backdrop of the factual milieu of each individual case anticipatory bail, the paramount consideration before the Court is that the concession so granted ought not to occasion any impediment in the fair and effective conduct of investigation. In circumstances where the a -20308-2023 State of Maharashtra v. Mohd. Sajid Husain Mohd. S. Husain [State Maharashtra v. Mohd. Sajid Husain Mohd. S. Husain, (2008) 1 SCC 213 : (2008) 1 SCC (Cri) 176] and Union of India v. Padam Narain Aggarwal [Union of India v. Padam Narain Aggarwal, (2008) 13 SCC 305 : (2009) 1 SCC (Cri) 1] .)” Economic offences 78. 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 fabric of the society. In Directorate of Enforcement v. Ashok Kumar Jain [Directorate of Enforcement 105 : 1998 SCC (Cri) 510], it was accused is not entitled to anticipatory bail.” 15. In Sushila Agrawal and others v. State (NCT of Delhi) and Another reported in (2020) 5 SCC 1 held that while considering an application for grant of pre Court has to consider the nature of the offence, the role of the person, the likelihood of his influencing the course of investigation, or tampering with evidence or likelihood of fleeing justice. The Court held: “92.4. Courts ought to be generally guided by considerations such as the nature and gravity of the offences, the role attributed to the applicant, and the facts of the case, while considering whether to grant anticipatory bail, or refuse it. Whether to grant or not is a matter of discretion; equally whether and if so, what kind of special conditions are to be imposed (or not imposed) are dependent on facts of the case, and subject to the discretion of the court.” The grant of bail is intrinsically linked with the cherished right to personal liberty enshrined under the Constitution and any adjudication in this regard must necessarily be undertaken in the backdrop of the factual of each individual case. While considering an application for anticipatory bail, the paramount consideration before the Court is that the concession so granted ought not to occasion any impediment in the fair and effective conduct of investigation. In circumstances where the a 7 State of Maharashtra v. Mohd. Sajid Husain Mohd. S. Husain [State Maharashtra v. Mohd. Sajid Husain Mohd. S. Husain, (2008) 1 SCC 213 : (2008) 1 SCC (Cri) 176] and Union of India v. Padam Narain Aggarwal [Union of India v. Padam Narain Aggarwal, (2008) 13 SCC 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 Directorate of Enforcement v. Ashok Kumar Jain [Directorate of Enforcement v. Ashok Kumar Jain, (1998) 2 SCC , it was held that in economic offences, the accused is not entitled to anticipatory bail.” Sushila Agrawal and others v. State (NCT of Delhi) and reported in (2020) 5 SCC 1, Constitution Bench of this Court held that while considering an application for grant of pre-arrest bail the Court has to consider the nature of the offence, the role of the person, the likelihood of his influencing the course of investigation, or tampering with ikelihood of fleeing justice. The Court held:- “92.4. The Court held:- “92.4. Courts ought to be generally guided by considerations such as the nature and gravity of the offences, the role attributed to the applicant, and the facts of the case, while considering whether to anticipatory bail, or refuse it. Whether to grant or not is a matter of discretion; equally whether and if so, what kind of special conditions are to be imposed (or not imposed) are dependent on facts of the case, and subject to the discretion of the The grant of bail is intrinsically linked with the cherished right to personal liberty enshrined under the Constitution and any adjudication in this regard must necessarily be undertaken in the backdrop of the factual . While considering an application for anticipatory bail, the paramount consideration before the Court is that the concession so granted ought not to occasion any impediment in the fair and effective conduct of investigation. In circumstances where the applicant State of Maharashtra v. Mohd. Sajid Husain Mohd. S. Husain [State of Maharashtra v. Mohd. Sajid Husain Mohd. S. Husain, (2008) 1 SCC 213 : (2008) 1 SCC (Cri) 176] and Union of India v. Padam Narain Aggarwal [Union of India v. Padam Narain Aggarwal, (2008) 13 SCC CrPC being an extraordinary remedy, has to be exercised sparingly; more so, in cases of economic offences. class as they affect the economic Directorate of Enforcement v. Ashok Kumar SCC held that in economic offences, the Sushila Agrawal and others v. State (NCT of Delhi) and f this Court arrest bail the Court has to consider the nature of the offence, the role of the person, the likelihood of his influencing the course of investigation, or tampering with “92.4. Courts ought to be generally guided by considerations such as the nature and gravity of the offences, the role attributed to the applicant, and the facts of the case, while considering whether to anticipatory bail, or refuse it. Whether to grant or not is a matter of discretion; equally whether and if so, what kind of special conditions are to be imposed (or not imposed) are dependent on facts of the case, and subject to the discretion of the The grant of bail is intrinsically linked with the cherished right to personal liberty enshrined under the Constitution and any adjudication in this regard must necessarily be undertaken in the backdrop of the factual . While considering an application for anticipatory bail, the paramount consideration before the Court is that the concession so granted ought not to occasion any impediment in the fair and pplicant- AJAY KUMAR 2025.09.09 13:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- accused has already been extended the benefit of interim protection for a long period of about 2½ years and he has joined the investigation pursuant thereto and record does not reflect any act of misuse/abuse of such concession, the balance of con accused. made on behalf of petitioner to contend that the co that he is making an endeavour to make good the financial loss victims. It is trite law that mere extension of certain financial concessions or payment by the accused in order to redress, wholly or partially, the pecuniary loss of the complainant/victims cannot, by itself, constitute a valid ground for entirety of the factual FIR in question dispute; the petitioner having been extended the concession of interim protection since till date; when required by the Investigating Office having been brought forward to indicate that the petitioner has misused the concession of ad this Court is inclined to confirm the 22.05.2024 earlier absolute, subject to the conditions as enumerated under Section 4 Cr.P.C.. -20308-2023 accused has already been extended the benefit of interim protection for a long period of about 2½ years and he has joined the investigation pursuant thereto and record does not reflect any act of misuse/abuse of such concession, the balance of convenience tilt in favour of such an applicant In the factual matrix of the instant case, an attempt has been made on behalf of petitioner to contend that the co that he is making an endeavour to make good the financial loss victims. It is trite law that mere extension of certain financial concessions or payment by the accused in order to redress, wholly or partially, the pecuniary loss of the complainant/victims cannot, by itself, constitute a valid ground for grant of anticipatory bail. However, k entirety of the factual milieu of the case in hand; especially the factum of the FIR in question, seemingly to have arisen the petitioner having been extended the concession of interim protection since 25.04.2023 and 22.05.2024 the petitioner making himself available for interrogation as and when required by the Investigating Office been brought forward to indicate that the petitioner has misused the concession of ad-interim bail which was afforded to him since this Court is inclined to confirm the interim order 22.05.2024 earlier passed by this Court absolute, subject to the conditions as enumerated under Section 4 8 accused has already been extended the benefit of interim protection for a long period of about 2½ years and he has joined the investigation pursuant thereto and record does not reflect any act of misuse/abuse of such venience tilt in favour of such an applicant In the factual matrix of the instant case, an attempt has been made on behalf of petitioner to contend that the co-accused has conceded that he is making an endeavour to make good the financial loss caused to the victims. It is trite law that mere extension of certain financial concessions or payment by the accused in order to redress, wholly or partially, the pecuniary loss of the complainant/victims cannot, by itself, constitute a grant of anticipatory bail. However, keeping in view the of the case in hand; especially the factum of the seemingly to have arisen out of a commercial kind of the petitioner having been extended the concession of interim and 22.05.2024, respectively, which is in vogue the petitioner making himself available for interrogation as and when required by the Investigating Officer; no specific and tangible material been brought forward to indicate that the petitioner has misused the interim bail which was afforded to him since 25.04.2023 interim orders dated 25.04.2023 and passed by this Court and the same are hereby made absolute, subject to the conditions as enumerated under Section 438(2) accused has already been extended the benefit of interim protection for a long period of about 2½ years and he has joined the investigation pursuant thereto and record does not reflect any act of misuse/abuse of such venience tilt in favour of such an applicant- In the factual matrix of the instant case, an attempt has been accused has conceded caused to the victims. It is trite law that mere extension of certain financial concessions or payment by the accused in order to redress, wholly or partially, the pecuniary loss of the complainant/victims cannot, by itself, constitute a eeping in view the of the case in hand; especially the factum of the out of a commercial kind of the petitioner having been extended the concession of interim which is in vogue the petitioner making himself available for interrogation as and no specific and tangible material been brought forward to indicate that the petitioner has misused the .2023; and made (2) of AJAY KUMAR 2025.09.09 13:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- 10. be read granting petitioner indefinite protection from arrest. It shall be confined to the FIR mentioned ibid and will not operate in respect of any other incident that involves commission 11. cancellation/recall of this order in case the petitioner violates any condition stipulated under Section sufficient cause. 12. be construed to be an opinion on the merits of the case. September 08 Ajay -20308-2023 This order should not be treated as “blanket” order. It will not be read granting petitioner indefinite protection from arrest. It shall be confined to the FIR mentioned ibid and will not operate in respect of any other incident that involves commission of an offence. Liberty is reserved in favour of State/complainant to move for cancellation/recall of this order in case the petitioner violates any condition stipulated under Section 438(2) of Cr.P.C. sufficient cause. Needless to say that anything observed herein above shall not be construed to be an opinion on the merits of the case. September 08, 2025 Whether speaking/reasoned: Whether reportable: 9 This order should not be treated as “blanket” order. It will not be read granting petitioner indefinite protection from arrest. It shall be confined to the FIR mentioned ibid and will not operate in respect of any of an offence. Liberty is reserved in favour of State/complainant to move for cancellation/recall of this order in case the petitioner violates any condition 438(2) of Cr.P.C. or upon showing any other Needless to say that anything observed herein above shall not be construed to be an opinion on the merits of the case. (SUMEET GOEL) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No This order should not be treated as “blanket” order. It will not be read granting petitioner indefinite protection from arrest. It shall be confined to the FIR mentioned ibid and will not operate in respect of any Liberty is reserved in favour of State/complainant to move for cancellation/recall of this order in case the petitioner violates any condition or upon showing any other Needless to say that anything observed herein above shall not AJAY KUMAR 2025.09.09 13:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document