Swati Mahendra More vs. State Of Maharashtra

Held

The Court granted anticipatory bail to the applicant. The primary allegations in the FIR were against the applicant's brother, Ramesh Batham. The Court noted the absence of specific allegations of personal interaction or representations made by the applicant to the informant. The only allegation against the applicant was the receipt of Rs. 1 lakh at his brother's behest, which was a significantly smaller amount compared to the total misappropriated sum of over Rs. 3.97 crores. Considering the limited allegations and the applicant's willingness to deposit Rs. 1 lakh, the Court found custodial interrogation unnecessary. The applicant was directed to be released on bail upon executing a PR bond of Rs. 30,000/- with sureties, permitted to deposit Rs. 1 lakh in the informant's account within four weeks, and required to cooperate with the investigation by attending the police station on specified dates and thereafter as called.

Facts

The applicant, Raju Balaram Batham, sought anticipatory bail in connection with a FIR registered for offences under Sections 406, 409, 420 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The FIR was lodged by Swati More, who alleged that her husband's consultancy firms, which provided services including GST payments, were managed by the applicant's brother, Ramesh Batham. The informant claimed that Ramesh instructed her to deposit money into his personal accounts and associated companies, promising GST payments, but instead misappropriated Rs. 3,97,61,663/-. The applicant's involvement was alleged to be limited to receiving Rs. 1 lakh at his brother's behest, without direct interaction with the informant.

Key Issues

1. Whether the applicant is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, considering the allegations of misappropriation of GST payments and his alleged role. Arguments for the Applicant: The applicant is a practicing advocate and is implicated solely due to his relationship with the main accused, Ramesh Batham. He had no direct interaction with the informant or made any representations. His alleged role was limited to receiving Rs. 1 lakh at his brother's request. Custodial interrogation is not necessary, and he is willing to deposit Rs. 1 lakh. Arguments for the Respondent (State) and Intervenor (Informant): The FIR clearly outlines the offence of misappropriation of a significant amount belonging to the informant, which was meant for government authorities. The applicant is involved as he received Rs. 1 lakh of the misappropriated funds. The informant's counsel supported these submissions.