UMESH C.BANERJEE, G.B.PATTANAIK
Enforcement Officer, Ted, Bombay – Appellant
Versus
Bher Chand Tikaji Bora – Respondent
ORDER
1. Leave granted.
2. The Enforcemnt Directorate is in appeal before us against the order of the learned Single Judge of the Bombay High Court granting anticipatory bail to the respondent invoking jurisdiction under Section 438 of CrPC. From a bare reading of the impugned order it appears that the learned Single Judge is of the view that because the responent was available for interrogation and the prosecution did not avail of that opportunity there should not be any justification for not granting the anticipatory bail sought for. We have no hesitation to hold that the learned Judge has misread the decision of this Court referred to in the impugned order. The critria and questions to be considered for exercising power under Section 438 of CrPC has been recently dealt with in Dukhishyan Benupani, Asstt. Director, Enforcement Directorate (FERA) v. Arun Kumar Bajoria1. The white-collar criminal like the respondent against whom the allegation is that he has violated the provisions of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act is a menace to the society and therefore unless he alleges and establishes in the materials that he is being unnecessarily harassed by the investigating agency, the C
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.