CRM-M- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT 101-1 Ankur Mittal 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. -27224-2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Ankur Mittal V/s State of Haryana CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Mr. V.K. Jindal, Senior Advocate with Mr. Akshay Jindal, Advocate and Mr. Abhishek Shukla, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Tarun Aggarwal, Additional Advocate General, Haryana. Mr. R.K. Samyal, Advocate for the complainant. ***** UMEET 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 02.06.2023, the following order was passed: “Present petition has been filed under Section 438 of C 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 (Section 3 of Haryana Protection o Depositors in Financial Establishment Act, 2013 added later on) at Police Station Thanesan Sadar. District Kurukshetra Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner has supplied the statement of accounts of the petitioner showing that the alle Rs 1,08,00,210/- had been duly transferred to the accounts of some of the complainants. He further contends that petitioner is ready to settle the entire dispute with the complainants and prays for interim protection Notice of motion. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-27224-2023 Date of decision: 08.09.202 ....Petitioner ....Respondent HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Mr. V.K. Jindal, Senior Advocate with Mr. Akshay Jindal, Advocate and Mr. Abhishek Shukla, 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.0080 dated 406, 420 and 120-B of IPC (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:- petition has been filed under Section 438 of Cr.P 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 the Indian Penal Code (Section 3 of Haryana Protection of Interest of Depositors in Financial Establishment Act, 2013 added later on) at Police Station Thanesan Sadar. District Kurukshetra. District Kurukshetra. Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner has supplied the statement of accounts of the petitioner showing that the alleged amount of had been duly transferred to the accounts of some of the complainants. He further contends that petitioner is ready to settle the entire dispute with the complainants and prays for interim protection. .2025 Mr. Tarun Aggarwal, Additional Advocate General, Haryana. for dated (Section 3 of the Haryana Protection of Interest of Depositors in Financial Establishment Act, Thanesar Sadar, District P.C. praying for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case bearing FIR B of f Interest of Depositors in Financial Establishment Act, 2013 added later on) at Police Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner has supplied the ged amount of had been duly transferred to the accounts of some of the complainants. He further contends that petitioner is ready to settle the AJAY KUMAR 2025.09.09 13:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- 3. this case: -27224-2023 Mr. Bhupender Singh, DAG Haryana, who is present in the Court, accepts notice on the asking of the Court and seeks time to file reply/status report and Mr. Rajinder Sharma, Advocate and Mridul Sharma, Advocate have put in appearance on behalf of the complain filed their power of attorney, which is taken on record and seeks time to file reply. Adjourned to 06.07.2023. Meanwhile, arrest of the petitioner shall remain stayed, till the next date of hearing. State is directed to file reply in pursuance of the statement of accounts furnished by learned Senior counsel for the petitioner. Learned counsel for the complainant is also directed to file a detailed reply, if they wish to do so. 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 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 St 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 pet learned State counsel, on instructions, informed the Court that as per the complainant- 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 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 2 . Bhupender Singh, DAG Haryana, who is present in the Court, accepts notice on the asking of the Court and seeks time to file reply/status report and Mr. Rajinder Sharma, Advocate and Mridul Sharma, Advocate have put in appearance on behalf of the complainant, filed their power of attorney, which is taken on record and seeks time to Meanwhile, arrest of the petitioner shall remain stayed, till the State is directed to file reply in pursuance of the statement of accounts furnished by learned Senior counsel for the petitioner. Learned counsel for the complainant is also directed to file a detailed reply, if they , 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 Senior counsel appearing for the petitioner: - nsel 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 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 Sohan Lal. The complainant-Sohan Lal had explicitly stated in his 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 ely Rs.97 lakhs had been allegedly given to the accused in cash. Learned State counsel has submitted that on the previous date of 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. . Bhupender Singh, DAG Haryana, who is present in the Court, accepts notice on the asking of the Court and seeks time to file reply/status report and Mr. Rajinder Sharma, Advocate and Mridul ant, filed their power of attorney, which is taken on record and seeks time to Meanwhile, arrest of the petitioner shall remain stayed, till the State is directed to file reply in pursuance of the statement of accounts furnished by learned Senior counsel for the petitioner. Learned counsel for the complainant is also directed to file a detailed reply, if they , 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 nsel 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 ate counsel, on instructions from ASI Surinder, has informed the Court that the FIR in question was registered Sohan Lal had explicitly stated in his 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 itioners 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 ely Rs.97 lakhs had been allegedly given to the accused in cash. Learned State counsel has submitted that on the previous date of hearing i.e. 02.05.2024, it had been erroneously noted that an amount of cash to the accused. AJAY KUMAR 2025.09.09 13:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- -27224-2023 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 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 petitio 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 petitioner, already stands returned 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 th 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 lakhs However, he has asserted that the amount which had been cash to the petitioners, was running into crores and that al 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, su 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 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 furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the Arresting/Investigating 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 th case.” 3 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 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/- 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 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 was to be done. On a pointed query put to the learned counsel for the complainant nt 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 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. 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 beer also been received; the investigating agency is looking into them and if required, would take riate action in accordance with law. 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 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 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 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 ners. 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 drawing the attention of this Court to the serious allegations levelled at 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 nt paid through bank transactions, he was not able to refute that the total amount through bank transactions was indeed Rs.10 paid in so required to be recovered He also argued that other than Sohan Lal, there were When a query in the said regard was directed towards the learned bmitted 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; would take Meanwhile, the petitioner is directed to join the investigation and appear before the investigating agency, as and when called upon to do so. to interim bail on his furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the Arresting/Investigating Officer. The petitioner shall abide by the terms and conditions as e connected AJAY KUMAR 2025.09.09 13:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- 4. dispute is primarily a business dispute implicated conceded at the Bar that he has the petitioner is trying to undo the financial loss caused to the complainant to whatever brought some sums of money into the account of the petitioners over to the Investigating Officer of the FIR in question counsel has urged that the FI business enterprises having not been successful and there culpability invoc It is further submitted that the entire dispute, even if tak of a purely civil and commercial nature arising out of contractual obligations and no ingredients of any cognizable offence are made out. 5. to the order has joined investigation grant of instant petition by arguing that allegations against the petitioner are serious in nature. 26.08.2025 by way of affidavit of Randhir Singh, HPS, DSP Ladwa, Kurukshetra, relevant whereof reads as under: -27224-2023 Learned senior counsel for the petitioner has submitted that dispute is primarily a business dispute and implicated into the FIR in question. Learned senior counsel has fairly conceded at the Bar that he has instructions the petitioner is trying to undo the financial loss caused to the complainant to whatever extent possible. In this regard, learned senior coun some cheques in the name of the persons who had deposited various sums of money into the account of the petitioners over to the Investigating Officer of the FIR in question has urged that the FIR in question essential business enterprises having not been successful and there culpability invocable against the petitioner in view of this factual backdrop. It is further submitted that the entire dispute, even if tak of a purely civil and commercial nature arising out of contractual obligations and no ingredients of any cognizable offence are made out. Learned State counsel, on instructions to the orders dated 02.06.2023 and 22.05.2024 respectively has joined investigation. Learned State counsel grant of instant petition by arguing that allegations against the petitioner are serious in nature. To buttress his arguments, h 26.08.2025 by way of affidavit of Randhir Singh, HPS, DSP Ladwa, Kurukshetra, relevant whereof reads as under: “4. That in previous reply dated 23.10.2024 the answering respondent had inadvertently shown an amount of Rs.1,27,71 amount received by petitioner but in actual the petitioner/accused had received total amount of Rs.1,20,77,041/ Rs.4,00,000/- Rs.1,00,000/- and Rs.100/ wrongly calculated in the amount received by the petitioner. 4 counsel for the petitioner has submitted that and the petitioner has been falsely Learned senior counsel has fairly instructions from the petitioner to state that the petitioner is trying to undo the financial loss caused to the complainant In this regard, learned senior counsel has cheques in the name of the persons who had deposited various sums of money into the account of the petitioners which shall be handed over to the Investigating Officer of the FIR in question. Learned senior R in question essentially emanates from the business enterprises having not been successful and there is no criminal able against the petitioner in view of this factual backdrop. It is further submitted that the entire dispute, even if taken at its face value is of a purely civil and commercial nature arising out of contractual obligations and no ingredients of any cognizable offence are made out. Learned State counsel, on instructions, has stated that pursuant 06.2023 and 22.05.2024 respectively, the petitioner Learned State counsel has, however, opposed the grant of instant petition by arguing that allegations against the petitioner are To buttress his arguments, he has referred to reply dated 26.08.2025 by way of affidavit of Randhir Singh, HPS, DSP Ladwa, Kurukshetra, relevant whereof reads as under: That in previous reply dated 23.10.2024 the answering respondent had inadvertently shown an amount of Rs.1,27,71,141/- as the total amount received by petitioner but in actual the petitioner/accused had received total amount of Rs.1,20,77,041/- as entiries of Rs.2,00,000/ and Rs.100/- of victim/complainant were amount received by the petitioner. the the petitioner has been falsely Learned senior counsel has fairly from the petitioner to state that the petitioner is trying to undo the financial loss caused to the complainant sel has cheques in the name of the persons who had deposited various which shall be handed . Learned senior emanates from the is no criminal able against the petitioner in view of this factual backdrop. en at its face value is of a purely civil and commercial nature arising out of contractual has stated that pursuant , the petitioner has, however, opposed the grant of instant petition by arguing that allegations against the petitioner are has referred to reply dated 26.08.2025 by way of affidavit of Randhir Singh, HPS, DSP Ladwa, That in previous reply dated 23.10.2024 the answering respondent as the total amount received by petitioner but in actual the petitioner/accused had s of Rs.2,00,000/-, of victim/complainant were AJAY KUMAR 2025.09.09 13:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- misused the said concession. 6. grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner by arguing that the made against the petitioner are serious in nature innocent people of that the petitioner has not returned the whole of the amount duped from unsuspecting common men at l prayed that anticipatory bail. 7. the record. 8. Hon’ble Supreme Court titled as Yashwant Patil and another whereof reads as under: -27224-2023 However, the above said amount of Rs.2,00,000/ Neeraj wife of Sohan Lal and Rs.5,00,100/ victim/complainant Anil Kumar instead of petitioner/accused. The petitioner/accused has returned a total amount of Rs.51,83,492/ victims/complainants of the present case but recovery of remaining amount Rs.68,93,549/- is still pending hence petitioner/accused is not entitled for any relief as claimed in the present petition and the same is liable to be dismissed. ” 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 made against the petitioner are serious in nature innocent people of large amount of money that the petitioner has not returned the whole of the amount duped from unsuspecting common men at large. With these submission, it has been 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 j 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 discovery of material facts and relevant information. Grant of anticipatory bail may hamper the investigation. Pre-arrest bail is to strike a bala the individual's right to personal freedom and the right of the investigating agency to interrogate the accused as to the material so far 5 However, the above said amount of Rs.2,00,000/- was received by Neeraj wife of Sohan Lal and Rs.5,00,100/- was received by victim/complainant Anil Kumar instead of petitioner/accused. The ed a total amount of Rs.51,83,492/- victims/complainants of the present case but recovery of remaining is still pending hence petitioner/accused is not entitled for any relief as claimed in the present petition and the same is 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 made against the petitioner are serious in nature as he has duped many large amount of money. It has been further contended that the petitioner has not returned the whole of the amount duped from arge. With these submission, it has been 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 o 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 was received by was received by victim/complainant Anil Kumar instead of petitioner/accused. The - to victims/complainants of the present case but recovery of remaining is still pending hence petitioner/accused is not entitled for any relief as claimed in the present petition and the same is However, it is not the case of the State that the petitioner has Learned counsel appearing for complainant has opposed the allegations as he has duped many It has been further contended that the petitioner has not returned the whole of the amount duped from arge. With these submission, it has been ought not be extended the concession of I have heard learned counsel for the rival parties and perused udgment of the Kishor Vishwasrao Patil vs. Deepak relevant “74. Ordinarily, arrest is a part of the process of the investigation o 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 nce 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 AJAY KUMAR 2025.09.09 13:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- -27224-2023 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 accused may provide information leading to discovery of material facts. It may be necessary to curtail his freedom in order to enable the 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 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 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 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 6 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] d 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 rmath of the crime and the connection of other persons, if any, in the crime. There may be circumstances in which the accused may provide 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, arrest may become an inevitable t 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 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 arrest, if passed while dealing with an application of the 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 eters 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 consider whether the accusations have been made only with the object of injuring or humiliating the applicant by arresting him or her. Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre [Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra, (2011) 1 SCC 694 : 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 secure several purposes. The accused may have to be questioned in detail regarding various facets of motive, preparation, commission and rmath of the crime and the connection of other persons, if any, in the crime. There may be circumstances in which the accused may provide information leading to discovery of material facts. It may be necessary to 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 arrest may become an inevitable t of the process of investigation. The legality of the proposed arrest of the Code. 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 arrest, if passed while dealing with an application of the 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 eters 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 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 [Siddharam , (2011) 1 SCC 694 : AJAY KUMAR 2025.09.09 13:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- -27224-2023 (2011) 1 SCC (Cri) 514] and other judgments and observing that anticipatory bail can be granted only in excep 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 while granting such relief, the court must record the reasons therefor. Anticipatory bail can be granted only in exceptional circumstances where the the applicant has falsely been enroped in the crime and would not misuse 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] , 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 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, Economic offences stand as a different fabric of the society. In Directorate of Enforcement v. Ashok Kumar Jain [Directorate of Enforcemen 105 : 1998 SCC (Cri) 510], it was held that in economic offences, the accused is not entitled to anticipatory bail.” 15. In Sushila Agrawal and others v. State (NCT 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.” 7 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 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 007) 4 SCC 434 :(2007) 2 SCC (Cri) 345] , 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 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 fluencing 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 plicant, 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 endent on facts of the case, and subject to the discretion of the 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 required to be satisfied and further while granting such relief, the court must record the reasons therefor. Anticipatory bail can be granted only in 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 007) 4 SCC 434 :(2007) 2 SCC (Cri) 345] , 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 of India v. Padam Narain Aggarwal, (2008) 13 SCC CrPC being an extraordinary remedy, has in cases of economic offences. class as they affect the economic Directorate of Enforcement v. Ashok Kumar SCC , it was held that in economic offences, the of Delhi) and , Constitution Bench of this Court arrest bail the Court has to consider the nature of the offence, the role of the person, the fluencing 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 plicant, 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 endent on facts of the case, and subject to the discretion of the AJAY KUMAR 2025.09.09 13:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- 9. to persona this regard must necessarily be undertaken in the backdrop of the factual milieu of each individual case. While considering an application for anticipatory bail, the paramount consideration concession so granted ought not to occasion any impediment in the fair and effective conduct of investigation. In circumstances where the applicant 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 accused. made on behalf of petitioner to concede 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 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 milieu of the case in hand seemingly having been extended the concession of interim and 22.05.2024 making himself available for interrogation as and when required by the Investigating Officer forward to indicate that the petitioner has misused the concession of ad -27224-2023 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 concession so granted ought not to occasion any impediment in the fair and effective conduct of investigation. In circumstances where the applicant accused has already been extended the benefit of interim protection for a g 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 made on behalf of petitioner to concede 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 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, keeping in view the entirety of the factual of the case in hand; especially the factum of the FIR in question ly to have arisen out of a commercial having been extended the concession of interim and 22.05.2024, respectively, which is in vogue till date making himself available for interrogation as and when required by the Investigating Officer; no specific and tangible material forward to indicate that the petitioner has misused the concession of ad 8 The grant of bail is intrinsically linked with the cherished right 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 applicant accused has already been extended the benefit of interim protection for a g 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 concede 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 order to redress, wholly or partially, the pecuniary loss of the complainant/victims cannot, by itself, constitute a valid ground for grant of eeping in view the entirety of the factual y the factum of the FIR in question out of a commercial kind of dispute; the petitioner having been extended the concession of interim protection since 02.06.2023 which is in vogue till date; the petitioner making himself available for interrogation as and when required by the no specific and tangible material having been brought forward to indicate that the petitioner has misused the concession of ad The grant of bail is intrinsically linked with the cherished right 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 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- accused has already been extended the benefit of interim protection for a g 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- instant case, an attempt has been made on behalf of petitioner to concede 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 valid ground for grant of eeping in view the entirety of the factual y the factum of the FIR in question the petitioner since 02.06.2023 ioner making himself available for interrogation as and when required by the been brought forward to indicate that the petitioner has misused the concession of ad- AJAY KUMAR 2025.09.09 13:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- interim bail which was afford inclined to confirm the earlier passed by this Court to the conditions as enumerated under Section 4 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 commissi 11. move for cancellation/recall of this order in case the petitioner violates any condition stipulated under Section other sufficient ca 12. be construed to be an opinion on the merits of the case. September 08 Ajay -27224-2023 interim bail which was afforded to him since 02.06.2023 inclined to confirm the interim orders dated passed by this Court and the same are hereby to the conditions as enumerated under Section 4 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 move for cancellation/recall of this order in case the petitioner violates any condition stipulated under Section 438(2) of Cr.P.C. other 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 ed to him since 02.06.2023; this Court is dated 02.06.2023 and 22.05.2024 and the same are hereby made absolute, subject to the conditions as enumerated under Section 438(2) of Cr.P.C.. 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 on of an offence. Liberty is reserved in favour of State/complainant/victim move for cancellation/recall of this order in case the petitioner violates any 438(2) of Cr.P.C. or upon showing any 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 Court is 02.06.2023 and 22.05.2024 made absolute, subject 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 to move for cancellation/recall of this order in case the petitioner violates any or upon showing any 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