Anticipatory bail refused for an absconding accused where custodial interrogation was needed to probe forged tax documents.

Anticipatory bail was declined where the accused was shown as absconding, had delayed approaching the court after an earlier Sessions Court rejection, and had not cooperated with investigation. The court treated custodial interrogation as necessary because the materials disclosed a prima facie role in forging and using fabricated documents for wrongful tax benefit. Given the risk of flight, avoidance of investigation, and the need for effective inquiry, the extraordinary relief of anticipatory bail was held unwarranted.

---

---

Issues: Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to an accused treated as absconding and against whom custodial interrogation was required.

Analysis: The petitioner was shown in the charge-sheet as not traceable and was described by the investigating agency as absconding. The petition for anticipatory bail was filed after an earlier rejection by the Sessions Court and after the charge-sheet had been filed against the other accused, indicating unexplained delay and avoidance of investigation. The materials also indicated a prima facie role in forging and using fabricated documents for wrongful tax benefit, making custodial interrogation relevant. Anticipatory bail being an extraordinary relief, the factors of likelihood of flight, cooperation with investigation, and the need to secure effective investigation weighed against grant of relief.

Conclusion: Anticipatory bail was rightly declined and the petitioner was not entitled to the relief sought.

---