Anticipatory bail in economic offence cases requires settled criteria and proof of unnecessary harassment, not mere availability for interrogation.

Anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure must be granted on settled criteria and not on a mistaken reading of precedent. In an economic offence, mere availability of the accused for interrogation was insufficient; the relevant consideration was whether the materials showed unnecessary harassment by the investigating agency. On the facts, the High Court had no justification to invoke Section 438, and the grant of anticipatory bail was liable to be set aside.

---

---

Issues: Whether anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 was justified on the facts of the case.

Analysis: The power under Section 438 is to be exercised on settled criteria and not on a mistaken reading of precedent. In a case involving allegations of economic wrongdoing, the Court held that anticipatory bail is not to be granted merely because the accused was available for interrogation at some stage. The relevant consideration is whether the accused shows, on the materials, that he is being unnecessarily harassed by the investigating agency. On the facts, the High Court had no justification to invoke Section 438 and grant anticipatory bail.

Conclusion: Anticipatory bail was wrongly granted and the order of the High Court was liable to be set aside.

---