Bail should be granted when the investigation is complete, the accused's role is limited, and the offence does not carry severe penalties, adhering to the principle that "bail is a rule and jail is exception" to protect personal liberty under Article 21.

ORDER

[1.0] RULE.

Learned APP waives service of rule for the respondent-State.

[2.0] The present application is filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) for regular bail in connection with FIR being C.R. No. 11213064250522 of 2025 registered with Upleta Police Station, Rajkot Rural for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 3(5) and 61(2) of the BNS and Sections 66(c) and 66(d) of the IT Act.

[3.0] Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant submits that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the offence. It is submitted that the present applicant has lodged the complaint qua misusing his account in connection with his account number during the period from 26.05.2025 to 31.05.2025 and an amount of Rs.7.42 crores have been deposited and siphoned by the accused persons. Charge-sheet is filed. The applicant shall co-operate in investigation on the contrary he is a victim. Considering the nature of the offence, the applicant may be enlarged on regular bail by imposing stringent conditions.

[4.0] Learned APP appearing on behalf of the respondent-State has opposed the present application on the ground that the present applicant is actively participated in the commission of offence. He has provided his bank account with a view to receive the commission of 1.5% and he has failed to receive the commission towards facilitating the cyber fraud and providing the account to facilitate the crime as he has not received any commission then he has approached the police and therefore, the entire offence and scam came into light. More particularly, one bank account was used in the name of M/s Manvish Enterprises and the present applicant applicant is proprietor of the said firm, and 58 cyber fraud complaint have been received. Hence, application does not deserve any consideration.

[5.0] While granting bail, the Court has to consider the involvement of the accused in the alleged offence, the jurisdiction to grant bail has to be exercised on the basis of the well settled principles having regard to the facts and circumstances of each case and the following factors are to be taken into consideration while considering an application for bail:

(i) the nature of accusation and the severity of the punishment and the nature of the materials relied upon by the prosecution;

(ii) reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witnesses and threat to the complainant or the witnesses;

(iii) reasonable possibility of securing the presence of the accused at the time of trial or the likelihood of his abscondence;

(iv) character behaviour and standing of the accused and the circumstances which are peculiar to the accused;

(v) larger interest of the public or the State and similar other considerations are required to be considered.

[6.0] I have heard the learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties and perused the investigation papers. In present case, following aspects have been considered:

(1) investigation is over and charge-sheet is filed;

(2) Applicant is behind the bars since 12.10.2025

(3) None of the offence alleged is punishable with life sentence or death penalty;

(4) nothing is required to be recovered and discovered from him;

(5) Perusing the investigation papers, it appears that the allegation against the present applicant is that the amount involved in the cyber fraud was credited to his bank account. In this regard, the Investigating OfÏcer has also registered a separate complaint. It further appears that the applicant had approached the police authorities on 27.06.2025 stating that transactions amounting to Rs.7.41 crores were carried out in his account during the period from 26.05.2025 to 31.05.2025, and that the accused persons had not paid him the agreed commission of 1.5%.

It further appears from the report of the Investigating OfÏcer that, except for providing his bank account in lieu of receiving 1.5% commission on