The Court emphasized that serious allegations of fraud necessitate custodial interrogation, outweighing personal circumstances presented by the petitioner.

ORDER :

This criminal petition is filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita , 2023 (for short ‘ BNSS ’) by the petitioner/A.3 seeking anticipatory bail in connection with Crime No.107 of 2025 of Mirchowk Police Station, Hyderabad. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Section s 318 (4), 316(5), 338, 336(2), 340(2) r/w.3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita , 2023.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 28.05.2025 at 21:00 hours, a written complaint was received from Mr. Mohammed Obaid Pasha, Secretary of the District Board of Seva Mutually Aided Cooperative Thrift and Credit Society Ltd., Hyderabad, alleging serious financial irregularities and fraud committed by one Pagidimari Mohd. Asif (Branch Manager), Sofi Romaan (Accountant) and Mohd. Sajid Ali (Field Cashier)- petitioner herein. The society, which provided interest-free microfinance services, had discovered discrepancies at its Charminar Branch during internal and external audits conducted in April 2025. A committee was formed to investigate, and meetings were held between 27th April to 20th May which revealed that Mohd. Asif admitted to misappropriating funds and creating fictitious loan accounts in collusion with Sofi Romaan and Sajid Ali. It was found that loans were sanctioned under false identities using mobile numbers registered in the names of Sajid Ali and his wife, without the Managing Committee’s knowledge or approval. The petitioner subsequently absconded from duty. The audit conducted by M/s.Manohar & Venkata confirmed that ₹59,70,150/- was unaccounted for due to deliberate manipulation and forgery. Based on these findings, the District Board requested registration of a criminal case under relevant sections for fraud, forgery, and criminal breach of trust. Basing on the complaint case was registered against the accused for the above offences.

3. Heard Sri Syed Mounis Jafer Abidi, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Syed Yasar Mamoon, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-State.

4. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that A.1 was already arrested and A.2 and A.3 were shown as absconding. There are no specific allegations against this petitioner except saying that he also conspired with A.1 and A.2. Further petitioner is the only person to look after his entire family and that his wife is pregnant and is in advanced stage and suffering with health complications. The petitioner himself is also a diabetic patient and his custodial interrogation is not necessary. Petitioner undertakes to cooperate with the investigation and prayed this Court to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the same stating that A.3 was assisting A.1 and A.2 in fraudulent activities. To find out the role of this petitioner, his custody is required. As such, requested this Court not to grant bail and to dismiss this petition.

6. Considering the submissions made by both the counsel and the material placed on record, the allegations against this petitioner is that he along with A.1 and A.2 mis-appropriated Society’s fund to a tune of Rs.59,70,150/-, by creating fake loan accounts in his name and his wife’s name. The investigation is still at initial stage and as seen from the record, the police have not recovered the amount. As the allegations are serious in nature involving huge amount, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner and the bail application is liable to be dismissed.