Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 16103
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
J. SREENIVAS RAO, J
Mohammed Sajid Ali – Appellant
Versus
The State of Telangana – Respondent
CRIMINAL PETITION No.9747 of 2025
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Syed Mounis Jafer Abidi
For the Respondents: Mr.Syed Yasar Mamoon
Anticipatory bail denied due to serious allegations of misappropriation and ongoing investigation, emphasizing the importance of protecting the integrity of the inquiry.
Headnote:(A) Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhitha, 2023 - Section 482 - Anticipatory bail sought for the petitioner accused of serious offences including misappropriation of funds amounting to Rs.59,70,150. - Petitioner claims involvement only as a Field Cashier, with no role in granting loans. - Prosecution contends petitioner misappropriated funds under benami identities and absconded from duty. (Paras 1-8)
(B) Bail - Considerations for granting anticipatory bail include the severity of the offence and likelihood of interfering with the investigation. - The court denied bail due to the gravity of the accusations and ongoing investigations. (Paras 7-8)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner, accused No.3, is alleged to have colluded with others to misappropriate funds from a credit society. Various loans were sanctioned under false identities.
Findings of Court:
The court found significant evidence against the petitioner and concluded bail was not warranted.
Issues: The case primarily revolves around the extent of the petitioner’s involvement and the severity of the accusations.
Ratio Decidendi: The court determined that due to the seriousness of the allegations and potential interference in ongoing investigations, anticipatory bail was inappropriate.
Result: Petition dismissed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. the petition for anticipatory bail is filed under specific sections. (Para 1) |
| 2. accusations involve serious financial misconduct with significant sums misappropriated. (Para 2) |
| 3. arguments from both sides regarding the petitioner’s role and implications. (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 4. evidence indicates serious allegations warranting careful court scrutiny. (Para 6) |
| 5. bail denied due to severity of allegations and ongoing investigations. (Para 7) |
ORDER:
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhitha, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) seeking anticipatory bail to the petitioner/accused No.3 in Crime No.107 of 2025 on the file of the P.S. Mirchowk, Hyderabad, registered for the offences punishable under Section s 338 , 318 (4), 316 (5), 336 (2), 340 (2) read with 3 (5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhitha, 2023 (for short ‘BNS’).
2. The case of prosecution in brief is that on 28.05.2025 at 2100 hours received a complaint from LW-1/Sri Mohammed Obaid Pasha, Secretary, District Board, Seva Mutually Aided Co-operative Thrift and Credit Society Limited, Hyderabad in which he stated that the above credit society offers free micro finance and thrift services to their members with a mission to empower EWS persons and also conduct routine inspections through consultant named as “Sarwath Research Foundation”. In the month of April, 2025 conducted inspection at Charminar branch office and found certain financial discrepancies as such formed internal committee and initiated preliminary investigation and multiple meeting were held between A-1 (Branch Manager) and internal committee. During these discussion A-1 confessed and disclosed name of A-2 (former accountant) that they had created fictitious loan accounts and borrower profiles under benami names and mis appropriated funds of Rs.11 lakhs and acknowledge the same in their writing. Further investigation revealed that loans amounting to 4-5 lakhs were sanctioned under benami identities without approval of knowledge of branch managing committee. To ascertain and validate the internal report district board engaged M/s. Manohar and Venkatata Chartered Accountants and after conducting depth audit the said CA’s confirms an amount of Rs.59,70,150/- remains unaccounted for due to serious irregularities. The petitioner/A-3 who is Field Cashier is absconding from duty since internal enquiry commenced. Hence, LW-1/Complainant requested for necessary action. Basing on the said complaint, registered a case in Cr.No.107 of 2025.
3. Heard Mr. Syed Mounis Jafer Abidi, learned counsel for the petitioner/accused No.3 and Mr.Syed Yasar Mamoon, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent-
State.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has not committed the offence and he was falsely implicated in the above crime. He further submitted that the petitioner worked as Field Cashier in Seva Mutually Aided Co- operative Thrift and Credit Society Limited, Hyderabad. The role of the petitioner in the said bank is only to recover the amount from the loanees. The petitioner is not having any role in granting loans. The entire allegations are levelled against A-1 and A-2 who are Branch Manager and Accountant. The ingredients under Section 338 are not attracted against the petitioner and the other offences levelled against the petitioner are imprisonment with less than 7 years. A-1 was already arrested and entire investigation is completed except filing of the charge sheet. He further submitted that the petitioner is not having any other criminal antecedents and he is the only breadwinner of his family and he shall abide by the conditions, which are going to be imposed by this Court, and he is ready to cooperate with the investigation, if any. Hence, the petitioner may be granted anticipatory bail.
5. Per contra, learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the petitioner has committed grave offence and they have mis-appropriated huge amount of
