ORDER :

P. M. RAVAL, J.

1. Rule. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor waives service of notice of rule for respondent – State of Gujarat.

2. By way of this application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, “BNSS”), the applicant has prayed for anticipatory bail in the event of arrest in connection with the FIR being C.R. No. 11189010250008 of 2025, registered with Cyber Crime Police Station, Morbi, District: Morbi for the offences punishable under Sections 316(2), 318(4), 319(2), 3(5), 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) and Sections 66(c) and 66(d) of the Information Technology Act.

3. Gravamen of the complaint is that de facto complainant received information on his Facebook Messenger from an ID namely Irina Fedorova regarding investments in the Stock Market and as the de facto complainant showed interest, the accused persons, in connivance of each other, hatching conspiracy in furtherance of their common object, created a WhatsApp Group in the name and style of Y96 SIG Customer Service in which, one of the accused namely Deepak Malhotra explained different alluring schemes and Group Admin Rohit Singh sent different bank account numbers for deposit of investment amount and thereby, made the de facto complainant to invest Rs.43,55,000/- and when requested for withdrawal, the de facto complainant was made to deposit further Rs.4,59,000/- towards Service Tax, however, despite such a deposit, the money of the de facto complainant was not repaid and thereby, the de facto complainant is cheated of Rs.48,14,000/- for which, the FIR in question came to be filed.

4. Heard, learned advocate Ms. Priyanka Gojiya for the applicant and Mr. Chintan Dave, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent – State.

4.1 The learned advocate for the applicant would submit that the applicant is innocent and is falsely implicated in the crime in question, merely on the basis of transfer of some amount into his bank account without any material to show any overt act or role played by the applicant.

4.2 The learned advocate for the would further submit that the allegations in the FIR do no reflect any direct act or inducement and/or communication or interaction between the complainant and the applicant. The applicant has not contacted the de facto complainant at any point of time, either through WhatsApp, Facebook or by phone calls. Further, the applicant was not a member of any WhatsApp Group nor he impersonated himself as Irina Fedorova, Deepak Malhotra or Rohit Singh or as the WhatsApp Group Creator.

4.3 It is submitted that allegation against the applicant is that a sum of approximately Rs.21,90,000/- was transferred to ICICI Bank Account belonging to the applicant, however, it is stated that mere credit of amount, does not in itself prove mens rea or any conscious involvement of the applicant or constitute the alleged offence.

4.4 It is further stated that the said bank account was not being operated by the applicant at the relevant point of time and one Jaydipbhai Lagariya was using the same for his business purpose and the applicant had given him the access of his bank account due to some financial constraints, which facts, the applicant also disclosed to the Investigation Officer (IO).

4.5 The learned advocate for the applicant would submit that the applicant has cooperated in the investigation and on three occasions i.e. on 12.10.2025, 22.11.2025 and 23.11.2025, the applicant appeared and remained present before the IO and also gave his statement and produced all the documents available with him including the Bank Statement and the Security Cheques. It is stated that the applicant has neither destroyed or attempted to destroy any evidence nor has he influenced any witness.

4.6 The learned advocate for the applicant would submit that the case is based on documentary and electronic evidence and hence, custodial interrogation of the applicant is not required.

4.7 The learned advocate for the appl