The court emphasized the serious nature of economic offences and allowed anticipatory bail based on parity between accused, subject to cooperation with the investigation.

ORDER

Dated this the 13^th day of January, 2026.

This is an application for anticipatory bail filed by accused No.3 in Crime No.4/2024 of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau (VACB), Thiruvananthapuram.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner/accused No.3 as well as the learned Senior Public Prosecutor. Perused the records including Annexure II bail order.

3. This crime was registered alleging commission of offences punishable under Sections 7 and 13(1)(a) of Prevention of Corruption (Amendment Act 2018) [‘PC (Amendment) Act’ for short hereafter] as well as under Sections 409 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code (` IPC ’ for short) by accused Nos. 1 to 3 after getting prior approval under Section 17A of the PC (Amendment) Act. The prosecution case is that High Range Rural Development Society (`HRDS India’ for short) is a charitable society registered under the Travancore-Cochin Literary, Scientific and Charitable Societies Registration Act District Registrar, Idukki, and the project implementing agency of DDU-GKY and Yuvakerala projects which are the Central-State Governments sponsored schemes intended to provide skill development training courses for poor youth and works for the public interest. The 1st accused the Secretary, the 2nd accused an employee of HRDS India and the 3rd accused, an employee of the State Kudumbashree Mission, holding the official position of State Program Manager (Finance) and the first responsible officer to prevent the misuse of the public funds provided to the HRDS India hatched criminal conspiracy in between them and abused their official positions thereby misappropriated Government funds allocated by the State Kudumbashree Mission to HRDS India as the PIA (Project Implementing Agency) for the implementation of three Government projects, amounting to Rs.5,63,24,597/-. The specific allegation against the petitioners is that out of this amount the 1st accused misappropriated Rs.89,70,000/- (Rupees Eighty nine lakh and seventy thousand only), the 2nd accused misappropriated an amount of Rs.77,83,000/-. Both of them misappropriated the fund under the pretext of withdrawing salary for the period from March, 2018 to April, 2023. Furthermore, some employees of HRDS India, along with A1 and A2 collectively misappropriated Rs.3,74,56,200/- from the total fund of Rs.5,63,24,597/-, under the guise of salaries, despite the fund being specifically allocated for the implementation of giving skill development courses and placement assistance to poor youth of the society. The 3rd accused, who has the responsibility to prevent this defalcation and report the same to the higher authorities, failed to take any action and instead assisted the 1st and 2nd accused , thereby causing huge financial loss to the Government.

4. The learned counsel for the third accused canvassed for anticipatory bail for the petitioner, whose complicity is on par with the accused Nos.1 and 2, who were granted anticipatory bail by this Court as per Annexure II order dated 22/08/2025 in B.A.No.9705/2025.

5. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application, while conceding Annexure II bail order.

6. While considering B.A.No.9705/2025, this Court observed thus-

“ 4. The learned counsel for the petitioners/accused Nos.1 & 2 argued that drawing of salary by the 1st accused to the tune of Rs.89,70,000/- (Rupees Eighty nine lakh and seventy thousand only) and the 2nd accused to the tune of Rs.77,83,000/- from Deen Dayal Upadhyaya Grameen Kaushalya Yojana (‘DDU-GKY’, for short hereafter) from the total fund of the Scheme that would come to Rs.5,63,24,597/- (Rupees Five crore sixty three lakh twenty four thousand five hundred and ninety seven only) is the allegation raised by the prosecution to a