Facts of the Case

Suleman Raees Hussain Ahmed sought anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC, apprehending arrest in C.R. No. 1798/2022 registered at Sakinaka Police Station, Mumbai, for offences under Sections 408, 420, 465, 471, 506, 509 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The FIR was lodged by Imran Mohammed Syed, owner of Inpact Machinery Pvt. Ltd., a company manufacturing machinery such as perfume filling, oil filling, packaging and overwrapping machines. An interim application by the intervenor (the same complainant, Imran Mohammed Syed) was also connected to this matter. This is a private commercial fraud allegation involving a machinery manufacturing business, with no GST issue.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether the applicant was entitled to anticipatory bail in connection with the alleged offences arising from a dispute with the machinery manufacturing company.

Petitioner's Arguments

  • Sought protection from arrest, contending (as is typical in such applications) that he was not liable for the offences alleged or that custodial interrogation was unnecessary.

Respondent's Arguments

  • The State opposed through the Additional Public Prosecutor; the Investigating Officer was present before the Court.

Court Order / Findings

  • Granted the application, directing that in the event of arrest, the applicant be released on bail on furnishing bonds of Rs. 25,000 with one or two sureties of like amount.
  • Imposed conditions requiring the applicant to report to the Investigating Officer on specified dates, refrain from interfering with the complainant or witnesses or tampering with evidence, and keep the Investigating Officer informed of his address and contact details.
  • Disposed of both the anticipatory bail application and the connected interim application.

Important Clarification

This is a routine anticipatory bail order in a private business fraud dispute involving a machinery manufacturing company — it contains no discussion of GST law and should not be mistaken for a tax-related judgment.

Sections Involved

  • Section 438, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — anticipatory bail
  • Sections 408, 420, 465, 471, 506, 509, 34, Indian Penal Code, 1860 — criminal breach of trust, cheating, forgery, criminal intimidation, and related offences

Decision – In Favour of

The applicant (Suleman Raees Hussain Ahmed) — anticipatory bail granted with conditions; the order does not adjudicate the merits of the underlying fraud dispute.

Case Details

High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction; Anticipatory Bail Application No. 3315 of 2022 with Interim Application No. 442 of 2023; Coram: Smt. Anuja Prabhudessai, J.; Date of Order: 06.04.2023.

Link to Download the Order

Click here to view/download the full order

Disclaimer

This content is shared strictly for general information and knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the assistance of AI tools.