Gujarat High Court
Amit Mahendrabhai Patel vs State Of Gujarat on 13 October, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/19211/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 13/10/2025
undefined
Reserved On : 03/10/2025
Pronounced On : 13/10/2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 19211 of 2025
(FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL)
With
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 18683 of 2025
With
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 18644 of 2025
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DIVYESH A. JOSHI : Sd/-
=======================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
-- √
=======================================================
AMIT MAHENDRABHAI PATEL
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
=======================================================
Appearance:
Criminal Misc. Application No.19211/2025 :-
MR HH PARIKH, Sr. Adv. with MR HEMANG H PARIKH (2628)
MR VISHVESHKUMAR H PANDYA for the Applicant(s) No. 1
Criminal Misc. Application No.18683/2025 :-
MR JIGAR G GADHAVI(5613) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
Criminal Misc. Application No.18644/2025 :-
MR MANISH J PATEL(2131) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS. MANUSHI M PATEL(16278) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
=======================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DIVYESH A. JOSHI
1. This batch of three applications being
interconnected with each other and arising out of
same FIR, is heard together and is being decided
by this common order.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/19211/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 13/10/2025
undefined
2. By filing instant applications under Section 482
of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023
(for short "BNSS"), the applicants have prayed for
anticipatory bail in the event of arrest in
connection with the FIR being C.R. No.
11201005250003/2025 registered with CID Crime
Police Station, Vadodara Zone for the alleged
offences as mentioned in the FIR.
3. Heard learned Senior Counsel, Mr. H.H. Parikh
assisted by learned advocate, Mr. Hemang Parikh
with learned advocate, Mr. Vishveshkumar Pandya
with learned advocate, Mr. Sagar Pandya for the
applicant of Criminal Misc. Application
No.19211/2025, learned advocate, Mr. Jigar Gadhavi
for the applicant of Criminal Misc. Application
No.18683/2025, learned advocate, Mr. Manish Patel
for the applicant of Criminal Misc. Application
No.18644/2025 and learned APP Mr. Rohan Shah for
the respondent - State of Gujarat in all matters.
4. Learned Senior Counsel, Mr. Parikh appearing for
the applicant of Criminal Misc. Application
No.19211/2025 referred to the FIR and submitted
that the so-called incident has occurred during
the period between 01.01.2019 to 31.12.2023, for
which, FIR has been lodged on 22.06.2025 and thus,
there is gross delay in registering the aforesaid
FIR, which itself suggests false implication of
the applicant in the aforesaid offence. He
submitted that the FIR has been lodged against
total 6 accused persons, wherein the applicant is
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/19211/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 13/10/2025
undefined
shown as accused no.3. He submitted that the State
Government has floated one scheme viz., Water and
Sanitation Management Organization (WASMO) in the
year 2002 and as a part of the said scheme, each
village has to form Water Committee to perform and
act of providing water to each house by tap
connection and for the said purpose, in each
district, Unit Office of WASMO is created and
accordingly, a Unit Manager, out of Deputy
Executive Engineer and/or Executive Engineer, is
appointed for the purpose of supply of water and
sanitation board. He submitted that as per the
scheme floated by the State Government, for the
purpose of carrying out work in the village, the
work upto Rs.7,50,000/- is to be done by the the
Water Committee directly, whereas for the work,
which comes to more than of Rs.7,50,000/-, the
Unit Manager has to issue tender and, thereafter,
work order is to be issued and all those works
have to be verified by the Technical Staff, Social
Staff and Monetary Branch and supervision of the
said work is to be carried out by the Unit Manager
as well as Field Staff, whereas measurement of the
work is to be measured by the Technical Staff and
Water Committee has to maintain measurement book,
thus procedure was mentioned to carry out the
work.
5. Learned Senior Counsel, at this stage, submitted
that the applicant is appointed on the post of
District Coordinator and he has no role to play in
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/19211/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 13/10/2025
undefined
carrying out any activity pertaining to the
financial aspect of the scheme floated by the
State Government. He submitted that as per the
duty assigned to the applicant, on receipt of the
bills from the Technical Staff, the applicant has
to forward those bills to the office of Unit
Manager for its approval/ sanction, which he had
done and thus except this, the applicant is not
attributed any other role and whatever he had done
was in discharge of his duty. In support of above
submission, learned Senior Counsel has emphasized
upon the guidelines issued by the WASMO and
submitted that nowhere in the said guidelines, it
is stated that any financial transaction has to be
carried out by the District Coordinator or he has
to verify the work done at the instance of Water
Committee or he has to supervise the said work. He
submitted that before registration of the FIR, the
applicant was called by the concerned authority
and at that relevant point of time, the applicant
had remained present and has extended all kind of
cooperation to the concerned Investigating Officer
and whatever documents demanded by the authority
concerned have already been provided by the
applicant. He submitted that entire case of the
prosecution hinges upon documentary evidence,
which have already been collected during the
course of investigation, therefore, custodial
interrogation of the applicant is not required at
this stage considering the above facts.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/19211/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 13/10/2025
undefined
6. Learned Senior Counsel submitted that at the time
of registration of the FIR, the prosecution has
come with a specific case that with a sole intent
to misappropriate the Government funds, certain
false and fabricated invoices and bills have been
placed before the applicant and those bills were
forwarded to the authority concerned by the
applicant without proper verification. He
submitted that in fact, those bills were prepared
by the Contractor concerned and the applicant
herein has forwarded it to higher-ups for its
sanction/ approval, therefore except this, no
other role is attributed to the applicant herein.
He further submitted that so far as the aspect of
site inspection is concerned, in each village, the
said work was assigned to the Talati-cum-Mantri,
Sarpanch and other members of the Gram Panchayat
and it is their duty to inspect the work and then,
to submit documents to the District Coordinator.
He submitted that the applicant herein had already
gone at the site for inspection and with the help
of members of the village panchayat, they have
inspected the work, however at the time of
registration of the FIR, not a single Sarpanch
and/or Talati-cum-Mantri is made as accused
despite the fact that they are primary responsible
persons as in their villages, all the activities
were carried out and they used to monitor the work
carried out by the contractor. He submitted that
considering the allegations leveled against the
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/19211/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 13/10/2025
undefined
applicant, custodial interrogation at this stage
is not necessary and he will keep himself
available during the course of investigation,
trial also and will not flee from justice. He on
instructions submitted that he is ready and
willing to abide by all the conditions including
imposition of conditions while releasing the
applicant on anticipatory bail. It is, therefore
urged that considering the above facts, the
applicant may be granted anticipatory bail.
7. Learned advocate, Mr. Gadhvi appearing for the
applicant of Criminal Misc. Application
No.18683/2025 referred to the FIR and submitted
that the applicant is shown as accused no.6 in the
aforesaid offence, however, the applicant has not
directly or indirectly connected and/or associated
with the alleged commission of crime and he has
been wrongly arraigned as accused only on the
ground of suspicion. He submitted that so far as
the allegations with regard to purchase of pipes
and generating bills are concerned, the applicant
has no role to play therein. He submitted that as
per the duty assigned to him, the applicant has to
supervise the work carried out by the Contractor
and submit report to the higher-ups and except
this, no other specific role is attributed. He
further submitted that after submission of report,
it is upon the higher-ups to make scrutiny and
verification and then, cleared the bills and,
thereafter, the payments have been made to
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/19211/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 13/10/2025
undefined
concerned Contractor and till date, no final audit
has been done and the payments have been made on
partial basis on running bills. He submitted that
so far as the allegations with regard to not
installation of pipes are concerned, some villages
of Santarampur are having stony surface,
therefore, it is not possible to carrying out
digging work, therefore, pipelines could not be
laid there. He submitted that the signature of the
applicant was found on the rojkam drawn by him but
so far as the purchase of pipe lines are
concerned, he has no connection with the said work
and whatever rojkam done by him was forwarded to
concerned Accountant, who after due verification,
forwarded it to Unit Manager and in turn, those
documents were forwarded to the Water Committee
and thus, at all level, the documents have been
verified and, thereafter, payments have been made
to the concerned Contractor, therefore, there is
no direct involvement of the applicant in the
commission of crime. He further submitted that in
fact, there is no document worth the name which
suggests that the applicant has received monetary
gain from the aforesaid transaction. He submitted
that in fact, since 06.07.2023, the applicant is
under suspension and as and when the applicant was
called by the concerned Investigating Officer for
interrogation, he has extended all kind of
cooperation, therefore now his custodial
interrogation is not required. He further
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/19211/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 13/10/2025
undefined
submitted that he is ready and willing to abide by
any conditions, which this Hon'ble Court may
imposed. It is, therefore, urged that the present
applicant may be granted anticipatory bail.
8. Learned advocate, Mr. Patel appearing for the
applicant of Criminal Misc. Application
No.18644/2025 submitted that the applicant is
shown as accused no.12 in the FIR, who was
appointed under the WASMO scheme on 03.03.2014. He
submitted that as per the duty assigned to him,
the applicant has to look after the work under the
Unit Manager, WASMO and has to visit the work
place and to carry out measurement i.e. recording
MB and, thereafter, to prepare bill and submitted
to the account department and except this, he has
no role to play and all the payments have been
made by the Water Committee consisting of Talati,
Sarpanch and all Members of Panchayat, wherein he
has no role to play. He submitted that in fact,
there is no specific allegation leveled against
the applicant and till date, no departmental
action has been taken against the applicant and
before registration of the FIR, the WASMO had
taken action against the Contractor concerned and
recovery process has already been initiated. He
further submitted that not only that, when the
interrogation of said Contractor was made, there
is no whisper about the name of the applicant,
which itself suggests false implication of the
applicant herein. He further submitted that in
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/19211/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 13/10/2025
undefined
fact, the employees, whose involvement is found in
the alleged commission of offence, have been
placed under suspension but no departmental
inquiry has been initiated against the applicant.
He further submitted that in discharge of his
duty, the applicant had paid visit of around 20
villages, where no such irregularities were found
but despite the said fact, the applicant is
wrongly arraigned as accused in the aforesaid
offence. He submitted that he has no concerned
with the supply of the pipes and he does not have
any knowledge about the same. He submitted that
entire case of the prosecution hinges upon
documentary evidence, which have already been
collected by the concerned Investigating Officer
and the applicant is not having any antecedent. He
submitted that considering the nature of
allegations, custodial interrogation at this stage
is not necessary and the applicant will keep
himself available during the course of
investigation, trial also and will not flee from
justice. He further submitted under the
instructions that the applicant is ready and
willing to abide by all the conditions including
imposition of conditions while releasing the
applicant on anticipatory bail. Learned advocate,
therefore, submitted that considering the above
facts, the applicant may be granted anticipatory
bail.
9. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Mr. Shah
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/19211/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 13/10/2025
undefined
appearing on behalf of the respondent - State has
opposed grant of anticipatory bail looking to the
nature and gravity of the offence. He submitted
that the State Government has floated one scheme
viz., "Nal se Jal" for the welfare of villages of
Mahisagar district, wherein several illegalities
and irregularities have been committed by the
accused persons in connivance with each other, as
a result of which, there is huge loss to the
Government exchequer and those amount have been
pocketed by the accused. He submitted that there
are several illegalities and irregularities
committed by the accused in connivance with each
other and those were found out during the course
of investigation, details of which are as under,
as per the scheme floated by the Government,
the work was to carry out in 620 villages of
Mahisagar district, wherein without carrying
out work, the accused have raised bills,
which were forwarded to higher-ups for its
approval/ sanction, thereafter, amount has
been released and thus without carrying out
work, bills for an amount of Rs.123.00 crores
have been raised, which are forged and
fabricated bills and thus, there is huge loss
to the Government exchequer;
out of total 620 villages, for 169 villages,
work order has been issued to particular
agencies to carry out work but the work has
been carried out by 169 agencies other than
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/19211/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 13/10/2025
undefined
the agencies, which have been allotted work
order and thus, there is malpractice adopted
by the accused in connivance with each other
for their personal benefits;
in 12 villages, though there was no tender
process undertaken nor any agreement was
issued to any agencies, payments have been
made before the issuance of work order;
out of total 620 villages, in 445 villages,
bills were forged with regard to the purchase
of pipes and on the basis of forged invoices,
bills were raised and the authority
concerned, without verifying the actual
position, have cleared those bills;
out of total 620 villages, in 445 villages,
the actual bills were not raised and the
accused have taken benefit of price
variation, wherein they have raised the bills
of more amount than the amount on which the
pipes were purchased and thus, absolute
forged and fabricated bills were raised with
a sole intent to dupe the Government;
as per the scheme, underground water pipes
were to be installed in total 620 villages,
however the agencies concerned have raised
bills for the purchase of pipes of 451
villages, which comes to around 4780 kms. and
thus the payments have been made for the
installment of underground water pipes of
4780 kms., however while examining the actual
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/19211/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 13/10/2025
undefined
site, it was found out that the installation
of underground water pipes was done for 2480
kms. only and despite the said fact, invoices
were submitted for more 2300 kms. and thus,
there is access payment than the actual work
and those amount have been misappropriated by
the accused;
out of total 620 villages, pipes were
supplied to 119 villages by the concerned
department but on verification, it was found
out that 74 villages have not received the
pipes supplied by WASMO and thus, remaining
pipes were used and/or misused by the accused
for their benefits;
as per the scheme, it was decided to provide
facility of tap connection to all the
units/residence of 620 villages but when the
inquiry was made, it was found out that the
bills were raised for the installation work
carried out in 202 villages and payments have
already been made but the connections were
lesser than the actual connections, for
which, bills were raised and thus, huge fraud
has been committed by the accused with the
Government;
as per the scheme, the Unit Management did
not have any authority to approve the tender,
however despite the said fact, the concerned
Unit Manager has flouted the guidelines
issued by the Government under the scheme and
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/19211/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 13/10/2025
undefined
approved the tenders in different villages of
8 talukas and thereby illegalities and
irregularities have been committed;
it was also found out during the course of
investigation that 570 bills were forged with
regard to the report of pipe testing of
Gujarat Industrial Research & Development
Agency;
it was also found out that 445 forged bills
were prepared in the name of total 31
different Companies, which are manufacturing
pipes and even 31 forged material testing
reports in the name of Airsh Consultancy have
been prepared and on the strength of those
forged bills, amount has been misappropriated
by the accused;
10. Learned APP, referring to above points, submitted
that above are the general points, which clearly
goes on to show that all the accused have in
connivance with each other have acted in
particular manner with a sole intent to dupe the
Government and by adopting such modus operandi,
the accused have defrauded the Government and
misappropriated huge volume of amount on the
strength of forged and fabricated bills and the
investigation carried out by the concerned
Investigating Officer clearly goes on to show
involvement of the accused in commission of crime.
11. Learned APP submitted that so far as the applicant
of Criminal Misc. Application No.19211/2025 is
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/19211/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 13/10/2025
undefined
concerned, he was discharging his duty as
Assistant Social in Virpur Taluka and District
Coordinator in Mahisagar district and as per his
duty, he has to coordinate with the members of
administration in helping them in financial
demand/file, preparation of completion
certificate, maintaining register with regard to
the work, to arrange awareness program and to
supervise the work. He submitted that in different
bills of Lunawada, Santarampur, Kadana, Khanpur,
Balasinor, Vipur etc. talukas, the applicant being
District Coordinator had made noting thereon and
forwarded it for its approval/sanction despite
knowing the fact that those bills are forged and
fabricated. He submitted that in fact, for issuing
the work order to particular person, the applicant
received 10% of the bill amount. He submitted that
during the course of investigation, one accused,
Jayantibhai Patel has been arrested and during his
interrogation, it was found out that he had paid
Rs.1,83,000/- as well as Rs.12,50,000/- in the
account Shiv Shakti Irrigation Branch. He further
submitted that when further investigation was
carried out, another amount of Rs.10,00,000/- was
also credited in the account of Shiv Shakti
Irrigation Branch and bank statements to that
effect have already been collected by the
concerned Investigating Officer, which clearly
goes on to show the involvement of the applicant
in the commission of crime by receiving
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/19211/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 13/10/2025
undefined
commission. He submitted that for the purchase of
pipes for 120 villages by the WASMO, payment of
Rs.16,25,56,831/- was made and in that process,
gate pass of total 120 villages have been
prepared, however, there is no signature of the
receiver on the said gate pass and even when the
inquiry was made by the Vigilance Department, no
pipe was found in 74 villages, which clearly goes
on to show that the applicant and the Unit Manager
had sold out those pipes to someone else and thus,
the applicant is required to be interrogated. He
submitted that it was also found out that testing
report of Gujarat Industrial Research &
Development Agency for the Villages :
Chikhalizoza, Ramana Muvada etc. as well as
invoices of Vinayak Polypies Pvt. Ltd. And Kankai
Pipes & Fitting Pvt. Ltd. are forged and
fabricated. It is, therefore, submitted that
considering the above role played by the applicant
in connivance with other accused in the commission
of crime, the applicant is not entitled for any
relief as prayed, therefore, the present
application may be rejected.
12. Learned APP submitted that so far as the applicant
of Criminal Misc. Application No.18683/2025 is
concerned, he was discharging his duty as
Assistant Manager Technical during the period
between 01.03.2016 to 05.07.2023 at Santarampur
taluka. He submitted that in discharge of his
duty, the applicant had done supervision work of
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/19211/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 13/10/2025
undefined
total 83 villages of Santarampur taluka and,
thereafter, prepared bills, however at the time of
submission of bills by the different agencies, the
applicant has not verified those bills because
those forged bills were submitted without any
installation work at particular place, where the
applicant had done supervision work and thus,
payments of bills prepared by the applicant have
already been made to the person concerned for no
work. He further submitted that in fact, despite
having knowledge about the forged bills submitted
by the different agencies, the applicant has
prepared bills and endorsed it and, thereafter,
forwarded it to the authority concerned for its
payment and accordingly, payments have been made,
as a result of which, huge loss has been suffered
to the Government exchequer. He further submitted
that it is also found out that for remaining
silent in such irregularities and illegalities,
the applicant has received commission from the
person concerned and thus, the applicant is
equally responsible in the alleged commission of
crime and even his active involvement is also
found out, therefore, his custodial interrogation
is required.
13. Learned APP submitted that so far as the applicant
of Criminal Misc. Application No.18644/2025 is
concerned, he was discharging his duty at
Assistant Manager Technical during the period
between 08.03.2019 to 17.01.2022 and being
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/19211/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 13/10/2025
undefined
Assistant Manager Technical, the applicant had
made notings on the bills of villages of
Santarampur, Virpur, Balasinor, Khanpur, Kadana
talukas and thereby recommended for its payment by
signing it without proper verification of work. He
further submitted that in fact, despite having
knowledge about the fact that actual work has not
been carried out by the person concerned, he
endorsed it and forwarded for clearance, which
itself suggest his involvement in the commission
of crime in connivance with other accused persons.
He submitted that it has also come on record
during the course of investigation that while
discharging duty as Assistant Manager Technical
and Deputy Manager (Technical), the applicant has
signed and forwarded total 164 bills of different
villages despite knowing about the irregularities
and illegalities committed by the person
concerned, which itself suggests hand-in-glow with
other accused and active participation in the
commission of crime. He submitted that it is also
found out that before issuance of work order on
20.09.2021, the applicant has signed on the
voucher dated 28.09.2020 and thereby endorsed it
and approved the bill and this is not the sole
instance but there are number of vouchers, which
have been signed and approved by the applicant
prior to issuance of work order. He further
submitted that malpractice has also been adopted
at the time of purchase of pipes because purchase
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/19211/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 13/10/2025
undefined
bills are in the name of Kamdhenu Company, whereas
while drawing panchnama, the pipes were found in
the name of Bhimani Company and on the same, there
is signature of the applicant. He submitted that
in Saliyabid Vagadiya village of Kadana Taluka,
though there was no work order issued in favour of
Jignesh Kalal, the applicant had endorsed the
bills and also approved it and while doing so, he
had not maintained measurement book. He further
submitted that despite knowing about the forged
bills submitted by the concerned agencies, the
applicant had endorsed it and also approved it,
which resulted into huge loss to the Government
exchequer. He submitted that even the concerned
agencies have also submitted forged testing report
of Gujarat Industrial Research & Development
Agency and all these facts were well within the
knowledge of the applicant and despite the said
fact, he remained silent just for his personal
benefits of getting commission. He further
submitted that it is also found out that for
remaining silent in such irregularities and
illegalities, the applicant has received
commission from the person concerned and thus, the
applicant is equally responsible in the alleged
commission of crime and even his active
involvement is also found out, therefore, his
custodial interrogation is required.
14. Having heard the learned advocates appearing for
the parties and perusing the investigation papers,
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/19211/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 13/10/2025
undefined
it is equally incumbent upon the Court to exercise
its discretion judiciously, cautiously and
strictly in compliance with the basic principles
laid down in a plethora of decisions of the
Hon'ble Apex Court on the point. It is well
settled that, among other circumstances, the
factors to be borne in mind while considering an
application for bail are (i) the nature and
gravity of the accusation; (ii) the antecedents of
the applicants including the fact as to whether he
has previously undergone imprisonment on
conviction by a Court in respect of any cognizable
offence; (iii) the possibility of the applicants
to flee from justice; and (iv) where the
accusation has been made with the object of
injuring or humiliating the applicants by having
him so arrested. Though at the stage of granting
bail an elaborate examination of evidence and
detailed reasons touching the merit of the case,
which may prejudice the accused, should be
avoided.
15. It is required to be noted that normal procedure
prescribed for curtailing the right to life &
liberty, is that the investigating officer can
arrest the accused even without warrant. No doubt
this Court has extraordinary power to protect an
innocent person. However, this power has to be
exercised by the Courts with due circumspection.
It is required to be noted that the grant of
anticipatory bail at the stage of investigation
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/19211/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 13/10/2025
undefined
may frustrate the investigating agency in
interrogating the accused and in collecting the
useful information and also the materials which
might have been concealed.
16. It is required to be noted that the time-tested
principles are that no straitjacket formula can be
applied for grant or refusal of anticipatory bail.
The judicial discretion of the Court shall be
guided by various relevant factors and largely, it
will depend upon the facts and circumstances of
each case. The Court must draw a delicate balance
between liberty of an individual as guaranteed
under Article 21 of the Constitution and the need
for a fair and free investigation, which must be
taken to its logical conclusion. Further, the
arrest has devastating and irreversible social
stigma, humiliation, insult, mental pain and other
fearful consequences. Regardless thereto, when the
Court, on consideration of material information
gathered by the Investigating Agency, is prima
facie satisfied that there is something more than
a mere needle of suspicion against the accused, it
cannot jeopardise the investigation, more so when
the allegations are grave in nature.
17. There is no substantial difference between
Sections 438 and 439 Cr.P.C. so far as
appreciation of the case as to whether or not a
bail is to be granted, is concerned. However,
neither anticipatory bail nor regular bail can be
granted as a matter of rule. The anticipatory bail
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/19211/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 13/10/2025
undefined
being an extraordinary privilege should be granted
only in exceptional cases. The judicial discretion
conferred upon the court has to be properly
exercised after proper application of mind to
decide whether it is a fit case for grant of
anticipatory bail. 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 therefore. 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 his liberty. In this regard,
a useful reference can be made to the decisions of
the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of D.K. Ganesh
Babu Vs. P.T. Manokaran & Ors., reported in (2007)
4 SCC 434; in case of State of Maharashtra & Anr.
Vs. Mohd. Sajid Husain Mohd. S. Husain & Ors.,
reported in (2008) 1 SCC 213; and in case of Union
of India Vs. Padam Narain Aggarwal & Ors.,
reported in (2008) 13 SCC 305.
18. It is well settled that an application preferred
for anticipatory bail is an exceptional remedy to
be granted in exception cases. The parameters and
considerations governing the grant of anticipatory
bail have been explained by the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in number of cases. At this stage, I would
like to rely upon the law laid down by the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in the case of (i) State Rep. by the
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/19211/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 13/10/2025
undefined
CBI V/s Anil Sharma reported in 1997 (7) SCC 187,
(ii) Adri Dharan Das V/s State of W.B. reported in
2005 (4) SCC 303 (iii) P. Chidambaram V/s
Directorate of Enforcement reported in AIR 2019 SC
4198, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held
held as follows:
"The legislative intent behind the
introduction of Section 438 CrPC is to
safeguard the individual's personal liberty
and to protect him from the possibility of
being humiliated and from being subjected to
unnecessary police custody. However, the
court must also keep in view that a criminal
offence is not just an offence against an
individual rather the larger societal
interest is at stake. Therefore, a delicate
balance is required to be established between
the two rights - safeguarding the personal
liberty of an individual and the societal
interest.
Ordinarily, arrest is a part of
procedure of the investigation to secure not
only the presence of the accused but several
other 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. It may
frustrate the investigating agency in
interrogating the accused and in collecting
the useful information and also materials
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/19211/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 13/10/2025
undefined
which might have been concealed. Success in
such interrogation would elude if the accused
knows that he is protected by the order of
the court. Grant of anticipatory bail,
particularly in economic offences would
definitely hamper the effective
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
accused as to the material so far collected
and to collect more information which may
lead to recovery of relevant information. In
this view, it cannot be said that refusal to
grant anticipatory bail would amount to
denial of the rights conferred upon the
appellant/applicant under Article 21 of the
Constitution of India.
CrPC being an extraordinary remedy, has to be
exercised sparingly; more so, in cases of
economic offences. Economic offences stand as
a different class as they affect the economic
fabric of the society. The privilege of the
pre-arrest bail should be granted only in
exceptional cases. The judicial discretion
conferred upon the court has to be properly
exercised after application of mind as to the
nature and gravity of the accusation;
possibility of the applicant fleeing justice
and other factors to decide whether it is a
fit case for grant of anticipatory bail.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/19211/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 13/10/2025
undefined
Grant of anticipatory bail to some extent
interferes in the sphere of investigation of
an offence and hence, the court must be
circumspect while exercising such power for
grant of anticipatory bail. Section 438 CrPC
is to be invoked only in exceptional cases
where the case alleged is frivolous or
groundless. Anticipatory bail is to be
granted as a matter of rule and it has to be
granted only when the court is convinced that
exceptional circumstances exist to resort to
that extraordinary remedy".
Having regard to nature of allegations
and stage of investigations, held
investigating agency must be given sufficient
freedom in process of investigation.
Appellant not entitled to anticipatory bail
as the same would hamper the investigation".
19. At this stage, it is required to be noted that as
this application has been preferred under the
provisions of Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik
Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of anticipatory
bail, I court would like to refer the decision of
the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Siddharam
Satlingappa Mhetre Vs. State of Maharashtra &
Ors.,, reported in (2011) 1 SCC 694, more
particularly Paragraph Nos.14 & 112, which read as
under :-
"14. It is clear from the Statement of Objects and
Reasons that the purpose of incorporating
Section 438 in the Cr.P.C. was to recognize
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/19211/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 13/10/2025
undefined
the importance of personal liberty and
freedom in a free and democratic country.
When we carefully analyze this section, the
wisdom of the legislature becomes quite
evident and clear that the legislature was
keen to ensure respect for the personal
liberty and also pressed in service the age-
old principle that an individual is presumed
to be innocent till he is found guilty by the
court.
112. The following factors and parameters can be
taken into consideration while dealing with
the anticipatory bail: The nature and gravity
of the accusation and the exact role of the
accused must be properly comprehended before
arrest is made; the antecedents of the
applicant including the fact as to whether
the accused has previously undergone
imprisonment on conviction by a Court in
respect of any cognizable offence; The
possibility of the applicant to flee from
justice; The possibility of the accused's
likelihood to repeat similar or the other
offences. Whereas the accusation have been
made only with the object to injuring or
humiliating the applicant by arresting him or
her. Impact of grant of anticipatory bail
particularly in cases of large magnitude
affecting a very large number of people. The
courts must evaluate the entire available
material against the accused very carefully.
The court must also clearly comprehend the
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/19211/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 13/10/2025
undefined
exact role of the accused in the case."
20. In case of Pratibha Manchanda and another Vs.
State of Haryana and another reported in (2023) 8
SCC 181, the Hon'ble Apex Court in Paragraph
No.21, observed as under:-
"21. The relief of anticipatory bail is aimed at
safeguarding individual rights. While it
serves as a crucial tool to prevent the
misuse of the power of arrest and protects
innocent individuals from harassment, it also
presents challenges in maintaining a delicate
balance between individual rights and the
interests of justice. The tight rope we must
walk lies in striking a balance between
safeguarding individual rights and protecting
public interest. While the right to liberty
and presumption of innocence are vital, the
court must also consider the gravity of the
offence, the impact on society, and the need
for a fair and free investigation. The
court's discretion in weighing these
interests in the facts and circumstances of
each individual case becomes crucial to
ensure a just outcome."
21. Now coming back to the facts of the case, I have
considered the allegations and accusations leveled
in the FIR and found out that during the period
between 2019 to 2023, the Government has floated
one scheme viz., "Nal se Jal Yojana" in Mahisagar
district, whereby it was decided to provide water
by tap connection to each house of 620 villages
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/19211/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 13/10/2025
undefined
through underground pipelines, however while doing
so, the accused persons, who are Government
employees, have misappropriated huge volume of
amount. It is also found out that with a sole
intent to favour certain Contractors, the accused
have not discharged their duty with honestly and
sincerity and have shown negligency in discharge
of their duty. Not only that, though there was no
work carried out by the concerned Contractor, the
documents have been forged showing completion of
work, which the accused have endorsed and
forwarded for its approval/ sanction and on their
recommendations, payments have been made for no
work. Thus all the accused have in connivance with
each other have acted in a particular manner, as a
result of which, the Government exchequer has
suffered loss of huge volume and all these facts
have come on record when the inquiry was made,
wherein active involvement of the applicants is
clearly found out on the strength of the
investigation papers.
22. It is required to be noted that the applicants are
Government employees and are discharging their
duty with the Government since number of years and
at the relevant point of time, they have
discharged their duties on different posts in
Mahisagar district when the Government had floated
scheme. While floating said scheme, certain
guidelines were issued, which ought to have been
adhered with by the applicants in stricto sensu
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/19211/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 13/10/2025
undefined
manner, however, it seems that just for their
personal benefits, they have shut their eyes and
permitted the irregularities and illegalities
committed by certain persons. Not only that, this
is a huge scam in crores of rupees, which has been
executed by all the accused in connivance with
each other and here in the present case, prima
facie involvement of the applicants in the
commission of crime is clearly found out.
23. I have considered the investigation papers
provided by learned APP during the course of
hearing and after having examined the same, it is
found out that in the scheme floated by the
Government, huge scam of misappropriation of
amount by the Government employees as well as
other private persons has been committed by
adopting certain modus operandi and as soon as the
said fact had come to the notice, inquiry was made
and while doing so, it has come to the notice
about the malpractice committed by the accused in
connivance with each other with a sole intent to
dupe the Government and just to receive undue and
unauthorized monetary benefits. It is also found
out that the applicants being Government employees
have received commission for the sanction/
approval and clearance of forged and fabricated
bills and material in that regard has also been
collected and those evidences and/or materials are
part and parcel of investigation papers. Thus
considering the above facts of the case, as there
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/19211/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 13/10/2025
undefined
is active involvement of the applicants in the
commission of crime, their custodial interrogation
is badly needed to unearth the truth. It is
required to be noted at this stage that the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in catena of judicial
pronouncements have observed that a court may
reject an anticipatory bail application when
custodial interrogation is deemed necessary for a
thorough investigation, even if the applicants
argue that such interrogation isn't required.
Further, while custodial interrogation can be a
factor in denying anticipatory bail, it is not the
sole determinant, and courts will also consider
other factors related to the severity of the
offense and the need for a comprehensive
investigation. Therefore as this is a huge scam,
custodial interrogation is required with a sole
intent to finding out material against the accused
persons, otherwise, it would not be possible for
the prosecuting agency to put forward their case
against the accused, which would ultimately fatal
the prosecution case.
24. It is required to be noted that in view of the
above settled legal position, it is no more res
integra that economic offences constitute a class
apart, as they have deep rooted conspiracies
involving huge loss of Government/ public funds,
and therefore such offences need to be viewed
seriously. They are considered as grave and
serious offences affecting the economy of the
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/19211/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 13/10/2025
undefined
country as a whole and thereby posing serious
threats to the financial health of the country.
25. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sumitha
Pradeep Vs. Arun Kumar C.K. & Anr., reported in
2022 SCC OnLine SC 1529 held that merely because
custodial interrogation was not required by itself
could not be a ground to grant anticipatory bail.
The first and the foremost thing the Court hearing
the anticipatory bail application is to consider
is the prima facie case against the accused. The
relevant extract of the judgment is reproduced
hereinbelow:-
"It may be true, as pointed out by learned
counsel appearing for Respondent No.1, that
charge-sheet has already been filed. It
will be unfair to presume on our part that
the Investigating Officer does not require
Respondent No.1 for custodial interrogation
for the purpose of further investigation.
Be that as it may, even assuming it a case
where Respondent No.1 is not required for
custodial interrogation, we are satisfied
that the High Court ought not to have
granted discretionary relief of
anticipatory bail. We are dealing with a
matter wherein the original complainant
(appellant herein) has come before this
Court praying that the anticipatory bail
granted by the High Court to the accused
should be cancelled. To put it in other
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/19211/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 13/10/2025
undefined
words, the complainant says that the High
Court wrongly exercised its discretion
while granting anticipatory bail to the
accused in a very serious crime like POCSO
and, therefore, the order passed by the
High Court granting anticipatory bail to
the accused should be quashed and set
aside. In many anticipatory bail matters,
we have noticed one common argument being
canvassed that no custodial interrogation
is required and, therefore, anticipatory
bail may be granted. There appears to be a
serious misconception of law that if no
case for custodial interrogation is made
out by the prosecution, then that alone
would be a good ground to grant
anticipatory bail. Custodial interrogation
can be one of the relevant aspects to be
considered along with other grounds while
deciding an application seeking
anticipatory bail. There may be many cases
in which the custodial interrogation of the
accused may not be required, but that does
not mean that the prima facie case against
the accused should be ignored or overlooked
and he should be granted anticipatory bail.
The first and foremost thing that the court
hearing an anticipatory bail application
should consider is the prima facie case put
up against the accused. Thereafter, the
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/19211/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 13/10/2025
undefined
nature of the offence should be looked into
along with the severity of the punishment.
Custodial interrogation can be one of the
grounds to decline custodial interrogation.
However, even if custodial interrogation is
not required or necessitated, by itself,
cannot be a ground to grant anticipatory
bail."
26. At this stage, it may be noted that as held in
catena of decisions, the economic offences
constitute a class apart and need to be visited
with a different approach in the matter of bail.
The economic offences having deep-rooted
conspiracies and involving huge loss of public
funds need to be viewed seriously and considered
as grave offences affecting the economy of the
country as a whole and thereby posing serious
threat to the financial health of the country.
Undoubtedly, economic offences have serious
repercussions on the development of the country as
a whole. In this regard, I would like to place
reliance upon the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in case of Y.S. Jagan Mohan Reddy Vs.
Central Bureau of Investigation, reported in
(2013) 7 SCC 439, in case of Nimmagadda Prasad Vs.
Central Bureau of Investigation, reported in
(2013) 7 SCC 466, in case of Gautam Kundu Vs.
Directorate of Enforcement (Prevention of Money-
Laundering Act), Government of India Through Manoj
Kumar, Assistant Director, Eastern Region,
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/19211/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 13/10/2025
undefined
reported in (2015) 16 SCC 1, in case of State of
Bihar & Anr., Vs. Amit Kumar @ Bachcha Rai,
reported in (2017) 13 SCC 751. The Supreme Court
taking a serious note with regard to the economic
offences had observed as back as in 1987 in case
of in case of State of Gujarat Vs. Mohanlal
Jitamalji Porwal & Anr., reported in (1987) 2 SCC
364 as under:-
"5. The entire community is aggrieved if the
economic offenders who ruin the economy of
the State are not brought to books. A
murder may be committed in the heat of
moment upon passions being aroused. An
economic offence is committed with cool
calculation and deliberate design with an
eye on personal profit regardless of the
consequence to the community. A disregard
for the interest of the community can be
manifested only at the cost of forfeiting
the trust and faith of the community in the
system to administer justice in an even-
handed manner without fear of criticism
from the quarters which view white collar
crimes with a permissive eye unmindful of
the damage done to the National Economy and
National Interest..."
27. Thus while taking into consideration the ratio
laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case
of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre (supra) as also
ratio laid down in other decisions as stated
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/19211/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 13/10/2025
undefined
above, I have gone through the contents of the
FIR, which is placed on record and also considered
the affidavit of the investigating officer filed
before the learned Judge concerned opposing the
bail application preferred by the applicants. Upon
going through the contents of the FIR, it appears
that prima facie case is made out against the
applicants and material collected so far suggests
the involvement of the applicants in the
commission of crime.
28. It is required to be noted at this stage that the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in catena of judicial
pronouncements have observed that a court may
reject an anticipatory bail application when
custodial interrogation is deemed necessary for a
thorough investigation, even if the applicant
argues that such interrogation is not required.
Further, while custodial interrogation can be a
factor in denying anticipatory bail, it is not the
sole determinant, and courts will also consider
other factors related to the severity of the
offense and the need for a comprehensive
investigation.
29. In view of above discussion and considering the
materials produced before this Court, I am of the
considered opinion that there seems to be a prima
facie involvement of the present applicant in the
commission of the alleged offence. Therefore, I am
of the considered opinion that at the initial
stage of the investigation of the offence, grant
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/19211/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 13/10/2025
undefined
of anticipatory bail in favour of the applicants
is likely to hamper the investigation and
investigating agency is likely to lose an
opportunity to find out correct story and/or
involvement of other stackeholders about all the
fact situation, probabilities or opportunities
which the Agency may get during the custodial
interrogation of a person, and therefore, keeping
in mind all the factors, no interference is
required at this stage. Therefore, I do not find
any exceptional ground to exercise its
discretionary jurisdiction under Section 482 of
the BNSS to grant anticipatory bail and it is
settled proposition of law that power exercisable
under Section 482 BNSS, 2023 to be exercised with
caution in exceptional cases.
30. Hence, the present applications seeking for
anticipatory bail are hereby rejected.
31. Needless to say that observations and findings
made hereinabove are limited to the decision of
these pre-arrest bail applications, and shall not
influence any other proceedings arise from
impugned FIR.
Sd/-
(DIVYESH A. JOSHI, J.)
Gautam
