Anticipatory bail refused in a cheating and forgery case where forged documents and custodial interrogation justified denial.

Anticipatory bail was refused in a cheating, forgery and conspiracy matter where investigation indicated use of a fake firm, forged bills and non-existent GST and firm details, along with active contact between the accused-petitioners and the main accused. The Court treated the allegations as more than a mere civil dispute over non-payment, noting that the goods were allegedly diverted and sold in the market and that custodial interrogation could assist recovery and disclosure of further facts. On that basis, the applications were rejected.

---

---

Issues: Whether the accused-petitioners were entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in view of the allegations of cheating, forgery, and conspiracy.

Analysis: The materials collected in investigation indicated that the complainants were induced to part with goods through a fake firm, that forged bills and non-existent GST and firm details were used, and that the accused-petitioners were in active contact with the main accused. The investigation further suggested that the goods were illegally sold in the market and that the alleged loss to the complainants was substantial. In these circumstances, the Court found that the accusation was not a mere civil dispute for non-payment of dues and that custodial investigation could aid recovery and disclosure of further facts.

Conclusion: The petitioners were not entitled to anticipatory bail and the applications were rejected.

Ratio Decidendi: Anticipatory bail may be declined where investigation discloses forged documents, active complicity with the principal accused, and the need for custodial interrogation in a cheating and conspiracy case.

---