Anticipatory bail in economic offences may be refused when custodial interrogation is needed to trace funds and uncover facts.

Anticipatory bail in alleged large-scale economic offences may be declined where the prosecution claims use of shell entities and fake invoices, and the investigation requires further custodial interrogation to trace funds and obtain facts within the accused's special knowledge. The material described in the document indicates that the court treated the ongoing investigation and the need for effective questioning as significant factors against pre-arrest protection, especially in a case involving diversion of public funds. On that basis, the petitioner was found not to have established a case for pre-arrest bail.

---

---

Issues: Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in a case alleging a large-scale economic offence involving fake invoices, diversion of public funds, and the need for further custodial interrogation during investigation.

Analysis: The allegations disclosed a serious economic offence involving a very large amount, with the prosecution asserting that the petitioner was connected with the creation and use of shell entities and fake invoices. The investigation was still in progress and the record indicated that further examination of the petitioner was required to trace the flow of funds and elicit material facts within his special knowledge. The Court also relied on the principle that anticipatory bail at the investigation stage may impede effective interrogation and collection of useful information, particularly in economic offences. In these circumstances, the Court found that the petitioner had not made out a case for pre-arrest bail.

Conclusion: Anticipatory bail was refused.

---