Sudha Swamy vs. State Of Maharashtra
Original PDF →Facts
The applicant, Sudha Swamy, sought anticipatory bail in connection with Crime No. 546 of 2025, registered for offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The case involves allegations of misappropriation of GST payments. The applicant's deceased husband was a tax consultant for the first informant/company. After his suicide in 2017, the applicant allegedly took over tax-related issues, including GST payments. Between 2018 and 2022, the company deposited Rs. 2,17,37,826/- into a joint bank account of the applicant and her father for GST payments. The allegation is that this amount was misappropriated. The charge-sheet has been filed against co-accused.
Held
The Court considered the papers of investigation and found that the amount in question was deposited in a joint account of the applicant and her father for GST payment, and this amount was allegedly misappropriated. Crucially, the Court noted that the applicant, after her father's death, transferred Rs. 1,10,53,124/- from the said joint account to her personal account. In light of the nature of the crime, the Court was not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant. The application for anticipatory bail was rejected.
Key Issues
1. Whether the applicant is entitled to anticipatory bail in light of the allegations of misappropriation of GST funds, considering the amount deposited and subsequently transferred to her personal account? The petitioner argued that there was a delay in lodging the FIR, that the funds were deposited in her father's account, and she was not the beneficiary. She also contended that a charge-sheet had been filed against co-accused, negating the need for custodial interrogation, and that she had no prior criminal antecedents. The respondent-State and the first informant argued that the account was a joint account of the applicant and her father. They further submitted that after her father's death in 2022, the applicant transferred Rs. 1,10,53,124/- from the joint account to her personal account, and given the nature of the crime, anticipatory bail should not be granted.
Sections Cited
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Sections 316(5), 318(4), 336(2), 336(3), 338, 339, 340(2) & 3(5)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
911-aba-2714-2025.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURI ICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2714 OF 2025 Sudha Swamy …Applicant V/s. The State of Maharashtra and Anr. ...Respondents Adv. Kaoer Milwalla, i/b Adv. Sahim Ansari, Advocate for the Applicant. Mr. V. N. Sagare, APP for the Respondent/State. Adv. B. S. Nayak a/w Adv. Sulakshana Survase, Advocate for the Respondent No.
CORAM : N.R. BORKAR, J. DATE : 24.03.2026. P.C. :
This is an application for Anticipatory Bail.
The applicant is apprehending her arrest in Crime No. 546 of 2025 registered at Waghle Estate Police Station, for the offences punishable under Sections 316(5), 318(4), 336(2), 336(3), 338, 339 340(2) & 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 3. The husband of the present applicant was working as a tax consultant with the first informant/company and was looking after all taxes-related issues, including the payment of GST. In Pramod S.Lakare 1/3
911-aba-2714-2025.doc 2017, he committed suicide. It is alleged that thereafter the present applicant started looking after the tax related issues of the first informant/company including payment of GST. It is alleged that, from 2018 to 2022, the first informant/company had deposited an amount of Rs 2,17,37,826/- in the joint bank account of the present applicant and her father towards the payment of GST. The allegations against the present applicant and other co- accused are of misappropriating the said amount.
I have heard the learned counsel for the applicant, the learned APP for the respondent-State and the learned counsel for the first informant.
The learned counsel for the applicant submits that there is a delay in lodging the FIR. It is submitted that the amount in question was deposited in the bank account of the father of the applicant and that she is not the beneficiary of the misappropriated amount. It is submitted that the prosecution has filed the charge-sheet against the co-accused and therefore there is no need of custodial interrogation of the applicant. It is further submitted that there are no other criminal antecedents against the applicant. Pramod S.Lakare 2/3
911-aba-2714-2025.doc
On the other hand, the learned APP for the respondent- State and the learned counsel for the first informant submit that the account in which the amount in question was deposited was a joint account of the present applicant and her father. It is submitted that out of the misappropriated amount, the applicant, after the death of her father in 2022, had transferred an amount of Rs.1,10,53,124/- from the said joint account to her personal account. It is submitted that considering the nature of crime, the applicant may not be released on anticipatory bail.
I have perused the papers of investigation. It appears that the amount in question was deposited in a joint account of the present applicant and her father towards payment of GST and they misappropriated the said amount. It further appears that the applicant, out of misappropriated amount, got transferred an amount of Rs.1,10,53,124/- to her personal account. Considering the nature of crime, I am not inclined to release the applicant on anticipatory bail. The application is rejected.
[N.R.BORKAR, J.] Pramod S.Lakare 3/3
Reproduced from the public record of the Bombay High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.