Bombay High Court Grants Pre-Arrest Bail to Applicant in Cheating and Criminal Breach of Trust Case — No Custodial Interrogation Required as Applicant Cooperated with Investigation. Applicant alleged to have induced complainant to invest in a company, but court found no prima facie case of dishonest intention and noted that the applicant had joined investigation and was not required for further custodial interrogation.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: BOMBAY In Favour of Accused
  • 4
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The applicant, Pranay Atul Mehta, filed an application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with C.R. No.84 of 2023 registered with Bundgarden Police Station, Pune, for offences punishable under Sections 405, 420 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 3 of the Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors (In Financial Establishments) Act, 1999. The case arose from a complaint that the applicant induced the complainant to invest in a company, but the investment was not returned. The applicant argued that he had cooperated with the investigation and was not required for custodial interrogation. The State opposed the bail application. The court, after hearing both sides, noted that the applicant had joined the investigation and was not required for further custodial interrogation. The court found that no prima facie case of dishonest intention was made out against the applicant. Accordingly, the court granted pre-arrest bail to the applicant subject to conditions, including that the applicant shall not tamper with evidence or influence witnesses, and shall appear before the investigating officer as and when required.

Headnote

A) Criminal Procedure Code - Pre-arrest Bail - Section 438 CrPC - Anticipatory Bail - Applicant sought pre-arrest bail in connection with offences under Sections 405, 420 read with 34 IPC and Section 3 of the Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors (In Financial Establishments) Act, 1999 - Court granted bail observing that the applicant had joined investigation and was not required for custodial interrogation, and that no prima facie case of dishonest intention was made out - Held that pre-arrest bail is granted subject to conditions (Paras 1-5).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the applicant is entitled to pre-arrest bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in connection with offences under Sections 405, 420 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 3 of the Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors (In Financial Establishments) Act, 1999.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The court allowed the application and granted pre-arrest bail to the applicant subject to conditions.

Law Points

  • Pre-arrest bail
  • Section 438 CrPC
  • Anticipatory bail
  • Prima facie case
  • Custodial interrogation
  • Cooperation with investigation
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2026:BHC-AS:4985

Criminal Anticipatory Bail Application No. 1775 of 2025

2026-01-30

Madhav J. Jamdar

2026:BHC-AS:4985

Mr. Hrishikesh Subhedar (for Applicant), Ms. Savita M. Yadav (APP for Respondent-State)

Pranay Atul Mehta

The State of Maharashtra

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Criminal Anticipatory Bail Application

Remedy Sought

Pre-arrest bail under Section 438 CrPC

Filing Reason

Applicant apprehended arrest in connection with C.R. No.84 of 2023 for offences under Sections 405, 420 read with 34 IPC and Section 3 of MPID Act

Issues

Whether the applicant is entitled to pre-arrest bail under Section 438 CrPC

Submissions/Arguments

Applicant's counsel argued that the applicant had joined investigation and was not required for custodial interrogation. State opposed the bail application.

Ratio Decidendi

Pre-arrest bail can be granted when the applicant has cooperated with investigation and is not required for custodial interrogation, and no prima facie case of dishonest intention is made out.

Judgment Excerpts

Heard Mr. Subhedar, learned Counsel appearing for the Applicant and Ms. Yadav, learned APP appearing for the Respondent-State. This application is filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with C.R. No.84 of 2023 registered with Bundgarden Police Station, Pune, for the offences punishable under Sections 405, 420 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 3 of the Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors (In Financial Establishments) Act, 1999.

Procedural History

The applicant filed an application under Section 438 CrPC before the High Court of Judicature at Bombay seeking pre-arrest bail. The court heard the applicant's counsel and the APP for the State and passed the order on 30th January 2026.

Acts & Sections

  • Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: 438
  • Indian Penal Code, 1860: 405, 420, 34
  • Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors (In Financial Establishments) Act, 1999: 3
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Restores Recount of Votes in Gram Pradhan Election Dispute. Upholding the Sanctity of Electoral Process – Recount Ordered for Disputed Polling Booths
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Grants Pre-Arrest Bail to Applicant in Cheating and Criminal Breach of Trust Case — No Custodial Interrogation Required as Applicant Cooperated with Investigation. Applicant alleged to have induced complainant to invest in a compa...