Bail in serious economic offence refused where prima facie material showed an organised deposit scheme and continuing investigation.

Bail in an alleged economic offence was declined because the investigation materials, including the FIR, witness statements and seized registers, showed a prima facie organised scheme of collecting deposits with promises of high returns. The HC treated the matter as a serious economic offence involving numerous depositors, substantial public loss and allegations of a deep-rooted conspiracy. It also considered that further investigation was still continuing. Applying the gravity of the offence, the public interest involved and the existing prima facie material, the Court held that the accused persons were not entitled to release at that stage.

---

---

Issues: Whether bail should be granted to the accused persons in a case involving alleged economic offences, cheating of depositors, and an ongoing further investigation.

Analysis: The materials collected in investigation, including the first information report, witness statements, and seized registers, disclosed a prima facie case showing the accused persons' involvement in an organized scheme in which money was collected from depositors with a promise of high return. The Court treated the offence as an economic offence of serious nature, involving a large number of depositors, substantial public loss, and allegations of a deep rooted conspiracy. It also noted that further investigation was still in progress and that the record contained sufficient material indicating prima facie involvement of the accused persons. In such matters, bail has to be considered in the light of the gravity of the offence, the larger interest of the public and State, and the circumstances showing possible continuation of investigation.

Conclusion: Bail was declined, as the accused persons were held not entitled to release at that stage.

---