Anticipatory bail granted after the Court found no need for custodial interrogation and noted the applicant's cooperation.

Anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was granted after the Court assessed the allegations, the applicant's attributed role, the business-transaction background, and the need for custodial interrogation. The absence of criminal antecedents and the applicant's willingness to cooperate and remain available for investigation supported the view that custodial interrogation was not required at that stage. The investigating agency's right to seek remand before the competent Magistrate was preserved in accordance with law, and the applicant was held entitled to anticipatory bail.

---

---

Issues: Whether the applicant was entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

Analysis: The application was considered on the nature of the allegations, the role attributed to the applicant, the need for custodial interrogation, and the surrounding circumstances placed on record. The Court noted the absence of criminal antecedents, the business transaction background, and the applicant's readiness to cooperate with investigation and to remain available for interrogation. It further accepted that custodial interrogation was not required at that stage. The Court also kept open the investigating agency's right to seek remand before the competent Magistrate in accordance with law.

Conclusion: The applicant was held entitled to anticipatory bail.

---