Anticipatory bail may be granted where the nature of the funds received is disputed as a matter of investigation, provided the accused has no criminal antecedents and undertakes to cooperate with the investigating agency.

THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER SECTION 438 Cr.PC (FILED U/S 482 BNSS) PRAYING TO GRANT ANTICIPATORY BAIL DIRECTING THE 1ST RESPONDENT POLICE TO ENLARGE HIM ON BAIL IN THE EVENT OF HIS ARREST IN CR. No.172/2025 OF PERIYAPATNA POLICE STATION, HUNSUR SUB DIVISION, MYSORE DISTRICT, REGISTERED FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 316(2), 316(4), 319(2), 336(3), 340(2), 318(4), R/W 3(5) OF BNS.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

ORAL ORDER

1. This petition is filed by the petitioner under Section 482 of BNSS praying to grant anticipatory bail in Crime No.172/2025 of Periyapatna Police Station registered for offences punishable under Sections 316(2), 316(4), 319(2), 336(3), 340(2), 318(4) read with Section 3(5) of BNS.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent –State.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that there is allegation of misappropriation of funds by Shri B Rajkshekhar Reddy -Accountant in collusion with outsourced clerk Sri Madhu P. S. to the extent of Rs.6,95,89,602/-. He further submits that the one Preetham who is working under this petitioner has received Rs.1,80,00,000/- to his account from Madhu. The said amount of Rs.1,80,00,000/- is the business amount of the petitioner as he is carrying cable and rice business. The petitioner has submitted his bank details has been given to Investigating Officer and he is ready to co-operate in investigation. The offences alleged against the petitioner are not punishable either with death or imprisonment. With these, he prays to allow the petition.

4. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent –State would contend that the total misappropriation of the amount in the case is Rs.6,87,44,000/-. The petitioner has received Rs.1,86,78,970/- from accused No.3. The said accused No.3 -Preetham has received the said amount from Madhu, who was working as an outsource clerk in Tobacco Board and there is allegation of misappropriation of funds by the said Madhu P. S and B. Rajshekhar Reddy. The petitioner has been issued notice and he has not appeared for investigation. The petitioner is required for custodial interrogation. With this he prayed to reject the petition.

5. Having heard learned counsels, the Court has perused the FIR, complaint and other materials placed on record.

6. As per FIR, One B. Rajshekhar Reddy - Accountant in collusion with an outsourced clerk namely Madhu P.S have misappropriated the funds of the Tobacco Board to the extent of Rs.6,95,89,602/-. During investigation the Investigating Officer has noticed that one Preetham who is working under this petitioner has received Rs.1,80,00,000/- from the said Madhu P.S. Thereafter, the said Preetham has transferred the said amount to the petitioner. It is submitted by learned counsel for petitioner that the said amount received by petitioner through Preetam is pertaining to their business transaction. Whether the petitioner is involved in the misappropriation of funds of the Tobacco Board or not is a matter of investigation. The petitioner has undertaken to co-operate with the Investigating Officer in investigations and abide by any conditions to be imposed by this Court. There are no criminal antecedents of the petitioner. Considering the above aspects, the petitioner has made out case for grant of anticipatory bail with conditions.

7. In the result, the following

ORDER

i) The petition is allowed.