Anticipatory bail is not an absolute right, especially in economic offences, where the court must balance personal liberty against the need for effective investigation.

ORDER :

HASMUKH D. SUTHAR, J.

1. By way of the present application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”), the applicant has prayed for anticipatory bail in the event of arrest in connection with the FIR being C.R. No. 11218009240833 of 2024 registered with Kamlabaug Police Station, Porbandar, for the o punishable under Sections 316(5), 318(4) and 61(2) of BNS, Section 3 of Gujarat Protection Interest of Depositors Act and Sections 21 and 23 of the Banking of Unregulated Deposit Scheme Act, 2019.

2. Learned advocate for the applicant submits that the applicant has nothing to do with the offence. The applicant is lady and has nothing to do with the offence. Her husband was Manager and he has put his signature. Complaint is filed belatedly. Though in a complaint, alleged embezzlement of Rs.17 lacs and odd, but in investigation the said amount is reveals as Rs.8.59 crore. Even during investigation, selective approach adopted by the police though one Munjaji Odedara who is also authorized in banking transaction, is not arraigned as an accused. Even other 11 members are also not arraigned as an accused. It is further submitted that, the applicant having her independent business of beauty parlour and she has not put her signature. Her husband has put his signature. The applicant is ready and willing to join investigation if she grants bail. Therefore, custodial interrogation at this stage is not necessary. Besides, the applicant is available during the course of investigation and will not flee from justice. In view of the above, the applicant may be granted anticipatory bail.

3. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent – State has opposed grant of anticipatory bail looking to the nature and gravity of the offence. He has submitted that the applicant was actively participated in the business of Society since 2014. She was Director and thereafter, every time, she has put her signature in the Resolution of the Society. Even she was authorized for banking transaction and she along with her husband were put their signatures. Amount of embezzlement is more than Rs.8.59 crore. Investigation is still going on and more than 600 members/investors are duped. The applicant has also withdrawn the amount through self cheque and transaction has been made in her bank account and there was money trail in her account. Further, the applicant is out of reach and her mobile is also switched of. Prior to registration of FIR, entire scam being done in the record of the society. The applicant being lady is entitled to claim anticipatory bail as of right. Hence, he requested to dismiss the present application.

4. This Court has considered the rival submissions made by learned counsel for both the sides and considered the material placed on record.

5. Having heard learned counsel for the respective parties and going through the allegations levelled against the applicant, it appears that the complainant is a member of Jalaram Credit Coop. Society Ltd., Porbandar. Society is registered under the Cooperative Societies Act. The applicant is engaged in the business of receiving and lending money and has received amount from very investors. Management of the Society is vested in the Board of Directors. At the relevant point of time, initially husband of the applicant was promoter and thereafter, he became the Managing Director and then became Manager and he himself appointed as Manager of the Society. The applicant is also a member of the Committee since 2014 and she was actively participated in the day-to-day affairs of the Society. As per the provisions of Section 73 of Gujarat Cooperative Societies Act and by-laws No.38, it is the duty of the Managing Committee and Manager to keep accounts and look after the day to day affairs of the Society. It further appears that after collecting money from the depositors, the accused by using the name of the Society, transferred the money to other acc