Anticipatory bail is denied in cases of grave economic offences involving large-scale misappropriation of public funds and forgery, especially when prior bail applications were dismissed by the High Court and upheld by the Supreme Court.

ORDER

Dated this the 1^st day of June, 2026 This is the 2^nd bail application No.31 in Crime No.252 of 2021 of Crime Branch Economic Offences Wing, Thrissur under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, apprehending arrest at the instance of the Investigating Officer.

2. The petitioner along with other accused have filed an earlier bail application vide B.A. No.13738 of 2025. This Court dismissed the same as per order dated 02.12.2025 and the order is as under:

“Accused Nos.24 to 27 and 29 to 31 in Crime No.252/2021 of Crime Branch Economic Offences Wing, Thrissur, have filed this anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, apprehending arrest at the instance of the Investigating Officer.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned Additional Director General of Prosecution appearing for the State of Kerala.

3. Here, the prosecution allegation is that, accused Nos.1 to 31 have committed offences punishable under Sections 120B, 406, 409, 465, 468, 471 and 420 r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short, ‘the IPC’ hereinafter)

and under Sections 13(1)(c) and (d) r/w Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (for short, ‘the PC Act, 1988’ hereinafter) and Section 13(1)(a) r/w Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption (Amendment) Act, 2018 (for short, ‘the PC (Amendment) Act, 2018’ hereinafter).

4. The prosecution case is that the accused herein hatched conspiracy and as an outcome of the same, they have obtained membership bearing No.18637 in the name of the complainant and thereafter, by using forged documents by providing the property of the 1st accused, a sum of ₹25 lakh was granted as loan vide SLM No.3929 dated 16.07.2011. Subsequently, in the same mode, on 27.03.2014, SLM No.4589 for ₹25 lakh; on 09.03.2015, SLM No.4843 for ₹50 lakh; on 26.03.2016, SLM No.5180 for ₹50 lakh; on 20.03.2017, SLM No.5495 for ₹50 lakh; on 31.03.2018, SLM No.5940 for ₹50 lakh; and on 11.11.2014, vide BOD No.744 for ₹50 lakh, were obtained, and the accused persons misappropriated the same through RUBCO. Thus, misappropriation of the principal amount of ₹3 Crore, along with accrued interest is involved in the case. In this connection, the complainant Sri.Muhammed Abdul Riyas filed a complaint before the Vigilance and crime was registered.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioners pointed out the age of the accused persons while canvassing anticipatory bail. According to him, the petitioners are innocent and they are ready to co-operate with the investigation.

6. The learned ADGP strongly opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners, submitting that the allegations against them are grave and that their arrest, custodial interrogation, taking of specimen signatures, and recovery of the money are necessary, and in such circumstances, the grant of anticipatory bail would impede the investigation.

7. On perusal of the prosecution records, the prosecution case is that the accused herein hatched conspiracy and as an outcome of the same, they have obtained membership bearing No.18637 in the name of the complainant and thereafter, by using forged documents by providing the property of the 1st accused, a sum of ₹25 lakh was granted as loan vide SLM No.3929 dated 16.07.2011. Subsequently, in the same mode on 27.03.2014, SLM No.4589 for ₹25 lakh; on 09.03.2015, SLM No.4843 for ₹50 lakh; on 26.03.2016, SLM No.5180 for ₹50 lakh; on 20.03.2017, SLM No.5495 for ₹50 lakh; on 31.03.2018, SLM No.5940 for ₹50 lakh; and on 11.11.2014, vide BOD No.744 for ₹50 lakh, were obtained, and the accused persons misappropriated the same through RUBCO. Thus, now an amount of ₹3 Crore, along with accrued interest is involve