Bail in disproportionate assets cases may be refused where a strong prima facie case and ongoing investigation justify protection of evidence.

Bail in a prosecution for alleged possession of assets disproportionate to known sources of income was considered on the basis that the material disclosed a strong prima facie case of economic misconduct. The court applied a stricter bail approach for a white-collar offence, noting that investigation remained in progress and further inquiry into financial transactions and property dealings was necessary. It treated the risk of interference with investigation and tampering with evidence as substantial. Personal hardship grounds, including medical condition and a son's proposed marriage, were found insufficient to justify release at that stage.

---

---

Issues: Whether the petitioner was entitled to bail in a prosecution for alleged possession of assets disproportionate to known sources of income.

Analysis: The Court assessed the material placed by the investigating agency and found that, even on the petitioner's own contention regarding ownership of some items, the remaining assets still disclosed a substantial disproportion to known income. The offence was treated as an economic and white-collar offence, warranting a stricter approach at the bail stage. The Court also noted that investigation was still in progress and that further enquiry into financial transactions, properties, and related dealings remained necessary. In these circumstances, the apprehension of interference with investigation and possible tampering of evidence was considered well-founded. The petitioner's medical condition was not accepted as a ground for release, and the proposed marriage of his son was held insufficient to justify regular bail at that stage.

Conclusion: Bail was not granted, as a strong prima facie case existed and the ongoing investigation required protection from possible interference.

Ratio Decidendi: In a serious economic offence involving a strong prima facie case and pending investigation, bail may be refused where there is a reasonable apprehension of interference with investigation or tampering of evidence, notwithstanding personal hardship grounds.

---