2025 (4) TMI 1582 - HC - GST

Seeking grant of privilege of anticipatory bail - criminal breach of trust and forgery related to misappropriation of funds - HELD THAT - Considering the serious nature of allegation against the petitioners and the requirement of their custodial interrogation during the investigation of the case this Court is not inclined to give the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Accordingly the prayer for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail to the above named petitioners is rejected.

Summary

The Jharkhand High Court, through Hon'ble Justice Anil Kumar Choudhary, rejected the petitioners' request for anticipatory bail in Baliapur P.S. Case No.103 of 2024, involving charges under Sections 467, 468, 471, 420, 406, and 34 IPC. The petitioners, members of A.M. Enterprises accused of criminal breach of trust and forgery related to misappropriation of over Rs. 19,00,000/-, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest. They contended the allegations were false, asserting legitimate supply of materials and payment through beneficiary samiti cheques, and highlighted a delay in FIR lodging and their relationship to a co-accused as the basis for implication. The State opposed bail, emphasizing the "direct and specific allegation" and the necessity of custodial interrogation to investigate forgery. The Court, noting the "serious nature of allegation" and investigative requirements, held that the petitioners are not entitled to anticipatory bail, stating the prayer is rejected.