Anticipatory bail denied due to serious allegations of misappropriation of substantial funds, stressing the necessity for custodial interrogation.

ORDER

These are applications for anticipatory bail filed under section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita , 2023.

2. Petitioner is the 2^nd accused in Crime No.885 of 2025, Crime No.849 of 2025, Crime No.851 of 2025, Crime No.853 of 2025 & Crime No.901 of 2025, all of Kovalam Police Station, registered alleging offences punishable under sections 316(1) and 318(3) r/w section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

3. The prosecution allegations in all these crimes are almost similar. In Crime No.885 of 2025, it is alleged that the accused had committed misappropriation of amounts deposited by the defacto complainant as fixed deposit with the Venganoor Co-operative Rural Development Society, Panangod, Thiruvananthapuram wherein he had deposited Rs.10,00,000/- and thereafter the accused failed to return the amount on maturity with interest by misappropriating the same and thereby committed the offences alleged. In Crime No.849 of 2025, the defacto complainant alleges that he had deposited Rs.14,57,000/- which was not returned to him on maturity while in Crime No.851 of 2025, the amount deposited was Rs.32,00,000/-, in Crime No.853 of 2025, it is Rs.10,80,000/- and in Crime No.901 of 2025, the amount deposited was Rs.5,00,000/-. Petitioner is the President of the said Society who is alleged to have been instrumental in misappropriating the amounts. 4. Sri.Sasthamangalam S. Ajithkumar, the learned Senior Counsel instructed by Adv. Mahima, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the prosecution allegations are totally false and that the petitioner has no involvement in the crime. The learned Senior Counsel submitted that the petitioner had been the President of the said Society for the last 24 years and he has been wrongly arrayed as an accused, after a business loss was sustained by the Society. According to the learned Senior Counsel, in the absence of any specific allegation against the petitioner and merely because he was in a supervisory position as the President of the Society, petitioner cannot be prosecuted. The learned Senior Counsel also submitted that petitioner has not amassed any property through illegal sources or means and hence petitioner ought to be granted anticipatory bail.

5. The learned Public Prosecutors on the other hand submitted that the allegations are serious and the petitioner along with other accused had misappropriated the amounts deposited in the society and that only a custodial interrogation would reveal the manner and mode in which the alleged crimes have been committed. According to the learned Prosecutor, the investigation conducted so far has revealed that the accused, especially the petitioner, who had functioned as the President of the Society for substantially a long period, had diverted the funds resulting in a loss to the Society. According to the learned Prosecutor, more than Rs.1.3 Crores have been misappropriated by the accused and the amounts having been deposited by the members of the society, it is money of the public and therefore custodial interrogation is necessary.

6. I have considered the rival contentions and have perused the case diary.

7. There are a total of 25 accused who have been arrayed as persons who had allegedly together misappropriated large amounts of money deposited in the society as fixed deposits. The accused include the Secretary, President-the petitioner, Vice-President, Accountant and other Board Members. The accused are alleged to have failed to return the money collected as deposits from numerous persons including the defacto complainants. The accused are also alleged to have misappropriated the amounts deposited and thus committed the