Regular bail in forgery and GST embezzlement allegations granted where no specific role was attributed to the accountant.

Regular bail was granted in an FIR alleging forgery, cheating and GST-related embezzlement because the petitioner, described as an accountant, was not linked by the record to any specific role in the alleged offence. The court also noted that similarly placed co-accused had already received regular bail, and that the petitioner had undergone custody for a period while the trial was unlikely to conclude soon during the pandemic. On these facts, continued detention was held unnecessary and bail was allowed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the petitioner was entitled to regular bail in the FIR alleging forgery, cheating and GST-related embezzlement.

Analysis: The petitioner was shown to be an accountant in the firm and the record did not attribute any specific role to him in the commission of the alleged offence. It was also noted that similarly placed accused had already been granted regular bail. Considering the period of incarceration and the likelihood that the trial would not conclude soon during the pandemic, continued custody was not warranted.

Conclusion: Regular bail was granted to the petitioner.

---