Anticipatory bail in economic offences denied where alleged director role and custodial interrogation justified deeper investigation.

Anticipatory bail was refused to an accused director in a multi-victim cheating and breach of trust case because the allegations showed a prima facie material role in the corporate and financial dealings. The Court noted his status as a director and signatory to resolutions, his alleged participation in obtaining loans for the project, and the need to trace the money trail and recover records to unearth the conspiracy. A verified medical condition was noted, but it did not outweigh the gravity of the economic offence and the need for custodial interrogation. The decision treats active involvement in alleged diversion of funds as sufficient to deny pre-arrest protection where investigation requires deeper scrutiny.

---

---

Issues: Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to an accused director in a multi-victim cheating and breach of trust case, in view of the allegations of active participation, loan transactions, and the need for custodial interrogation.

Analysis: The application was considered against the backdrop of allegations that the applicant was a director and signatory to company resolutions, had participated in obtaining loans for the project, and was connected with transactions that required scrutiny of the money trail and related records. The medical condition placed on record was verified, but the Court noted that the applicant's alleged role in the corporate and financial dealings could not be ignored at the stage of anticipatory bail. The gravity of the allegations, the multi-victim nature of the case, and the need to unearth the conspiracy and recover the cheated amount were treated as relevant factors weighing against protection from arrest.

Conclusion: Anticipatory bail was declined.

Ratio Decidendi: In serious economic offences involving alleged conspiracy, diversion of funds, and a need for custodial interrogation, anticipatory bail may be refused notwithstanding mitigating personal circumstances if the accused's prima facie role appears material to the investigation.

---