The court emphasized the need for custodial interrogation in economic offences and the delicate balance between personal liberty and societal interest, citing legal provisions and precedents to support its decision.

ORDER :

Learned advocate has tendered a draft amendment, the same is allowed in terms of draft.

1. RULE. Learned APP waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of the respondent – State.

2. By way of the present application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicant accused has prayed to release him on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in connection with the FIR being C.R. No.11191011220168 of 2022 registered with DCB Police Station, District : Ahmedabad City, for the offences punishable under Sections 409, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 34 and 120B of the IPC.

3. Learned advocate for the applicant has submitted that applicant is not connected in any manner with the offence. Learned advocate for the applicant has submitted that the present applicant is falsely enroped in the said offence and he has nothing to do with offence. It is submitted that charge-sheet is filed and there is no role attributed to the present applicant. It is submitted that in one room of his hotel, the alleged offence is committed, except this no any role is attributed to the present applicant. Even on the basis of statement of co-accused, he has falsely implicated in the offence. It is submitted that applicant has not received any financial benefit or gain and he has not also opened any account in the name of any fictitious or the bogus firm and he has also not obtained any GST numbers also and he has not also taken any undue advantage or any benefit of the so-called inputs credit. In view of above, he has stated under the instructions, he is ready and willing to co-operate with the investigation. Hence, the learned advocate for the applicant has requested to allow the present application.

4. Per contra, learned APP has opposed the present application and stated that accused is absconder. During the investigation, it came to know that the present applicant is involved in the last stage of conspiracy and the accused persons including applicant have duped the money of government funding and committed fraud of 852 crores and taken the undue advantage and cause loss to the government exchequer and the revenue. It is submitted that investigation is at the crucial stage and the thoroughly investigation is required. In view of above, she has requested to dismiss the present application. In view of above, she has requested to dismiss the present application.

5. Heard learned advocate Mr. U.J. Dave and learned APP Ms.Divyangna Jhala for the respondent-State.

6. Considering the fact that present accused is facing charges under Sections 409, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 34 and 120B of the IPC.

6.1. On perusal of the FIR, prima facie, it appears that the conspiracy by hatching conspiracy more than 100 fictitious firm and name of the sell companies of same transactions and fraud of Rs.852 crores have been committed. Investigation is at very initial stage and the allegation of the creating the forged and fabricated bogus bills and documents by using the said GST numbers and the documents, the inputs credit of amount has been credited in the accounts of the various accused. Prima facie, it appears that present offence is economic offence and such offence needs visited in different approach and approach is required while dealing with such offence as loss cause to the government exchequer and allegation of the conscription is there. Hardly direct evidence is available of the conspiracy and conspiracy is required to infer. So far as the allegations of conspiracy is concerned, large scale conspiracy is there. Considering the investigation is a very preliminary stage, custodial interrogation is required.

6.2. Further, the present applicant-accused is involved in white collar socio-economic offence which constitute a class apart and needs to be visited with a different approach. The economic offences adversely affect the economic and social fabric of the country. In such circumstances also, grant of anticipatory bail at this stage would frustrate the i