HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR, J
MANISH – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF RAJASTHAN – Respondent
CRLMB / 292 / 2025
(A) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 439 - Bail application - Petitioners arrested for offences under various sections of BNS and IT Act - Allegations of cyber fraud without individual complaints - Investigation completed, no apprehension of influencing witnesses - Bail granted subject to conditions. (Paras 1, 4, 5)
(B) Bail - Considerations for granting bail - Court must assess whether the accused can influence witnesses or tamper with evidence - The absence of such apprehension supports the grant of bail. (Paras 5, 6)
Facts of the case:
The petitioners were arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.481/2024 for alleged cyber fraud involving fake registrations on websites and cheating individuals. No individual complaints were made against them, and they were arrested based on suspicion. (Paras 1, 2)
Findings of Court:
The court found that the offences are triable by a Magistrate, the investigation is complete, and there is no risk of the petitioners influencing witnesses or fleeing. (Paras 5, 6)
Issues: The main issues were whether the petitioners posed a risk of influencing witnesses or tampering with evidence and the appropriateness of granting bail given the completed investigation. (Paras 4, 5)
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the absence of any apprehension regarding witness tampering or flight risk, along with the completion of the investigation, warranted the granting of bail. (Paras 5, 6)
Result: Bail applications allowed.
ORDER :
(KULDEEP MATHUR, J.)
These applications for bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. (483 BNSS) have been filed by the petitioners who have been arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.481/2024 registered at Police Station Kotwali Dungarpur, District Dungarpur for the offences punishable under Sections 308(2), 319(2), 318(4), 61(2)(a) and 111(2)(b) of BNS and Sections 66D and 67 of IT Act .
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the allegation levelled against the petitioners is that they made fake registrations on websites named “Locanto”, “Oklupe”, “Sudko” and cheated innocent persons in the name of providing escort service and got the money deposited by them in fake bank accounts. Learned counsel submitted that as per prosecution, 18 mobile phones, a large number of SIM cards, ATM cards etc. have been recovered at the instance of present petitioners.
4. Learned counsel submitted that in a nutshell the allegation levelled against the petitioners is of committing cyber fraud; no individual has made any criminal complaint against any of the petitioners; the petitioners have been arrested in the present case only on the basis of suspicion; and thus no case for the alleged offences has been made out against the petitioners and their incarceration is not warranted in the present case.
5. Lastly, learned counsel submitted that the petitioners are in judicial custody, investigation against them has already been completed and the trial of the case will take sufficiently long time, therefore, the benefit of bail may be granted to the accused-petitioners.
6. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail applications. However, he was not in a position to refute the fact that the investigation against the petitioners has already been completed. He was also not in a position to refute the fact that the offences alleged against the petitioners are triable by a court of Magistrate.
7. Having considered the rival submissions, facts and circumstances of the case, this Court prima facie finds that the offences alleged against the petitioners are triable by a court of Magistrate and the investigation against them has already been completed; learned Public Prosecutor has not shown any apprehension of petitioners influencing the prosecution witnesses, tampering with the evidence or fleeing away from justice, in case they are enlarged on bail. Thus, without expressing any opinion on merits/demerits of the case, this Court is of the opinion that the bail applications filed by the petitioners deserve to be accepted.
8. Consequently, these bail applications under Section 439 Cr.P.C. (483 BNSS) are allowed. It is ordered that the accused-petitioners (1) Suresh S/o Man Ji, (2) Manish S/o Shri Dhul Ji, (3) Naresh S/o Dal Ji, (4) Bharat S/o Gautam, (5) Pankaj @ Panku S/o Sh. Dungarji, (6) Darshilpuri S/o Sh. Shambhupuri, (7) Ramesh S/o Dayalal, (8) Dilip S/o Prem Ji and (9) Rohit S/o Amar Ji arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.481/2024 registered at Police Station Kotwali Dungarpur, District Dungarpur shall be released on bail, if not wanted in any other case, provided each of them furnishes a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- and two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each, to the satisfaction of learned trial court, for their appearance before that court on each & every date of hearing and whenever called upon to do so till completion of the trial.
9. It is however, made clear that findings recorded/observations made above are for limited purposes of adjudication of bail application. The trial court shall not get prejudiced by the same.
10. A copy of this order be placed in each file.
Bail granted under Section 439 Cr.P.C. due to completed investigation and absence of risk of influencing witnesses.
The court emphasized that when co-accused are granted bail under similar circumstances, the same should apply to the petitioners, considering the lengthy trial duration.
Bail can be granted when investigation is complete and co-accused have received bail, despite serious allegations.
Bail granted as no recovery is due from the petitioner and offences are triable by a Magistrate.
Bail may be granted if the accused is in judicial custody, the trial will take a long time, and there is no risk of influencing witnesses.
The court established that bail can be granted under Section 439 Cr.P.C. when the trial is expected to be lengthy and the offences are triable by a magistrate, highlighting the importance of the righ....
The court's decision to grant bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. was influenced by the consideration of the statements recorded in the charge-sheet and the conclusion of the Police after the investigatio....
Bail may be granted when investigation is complete and no risk of influencing witnesses exists, emphasizing case-specific evaluation.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.