ORDER

The petitioner has filed this petition under Section

438 of Cr.P.C. seeking anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in SouthEast CEN Crime Police station, in Cr.No.100/2022, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 419 & 420 of IPC and under Sections 66(C)

and 66(D) of the Information and Technology Act, 2000.

2. The brief factual matrix leading to the case are that on 26.02.2022, the complainant has set the law in motion by lodging the complaint wherein it is alleged that on 13.01.2022 one Jessie Basa contacted him through whatsapp pertaining to crypto currency platform and he was made to open an account in Paragon Options currency crypto and to recharge the said account, Rs.10,000/- was got credited. Thereafter, the complainant was given information as to how investment is to be done and further, he was directed that out of the benefits received, 20% to be paid to the company. Accordingly, on 21.01.2022, 6200 USD, on 27.01.2022, 6000 USD and on

09.02.2022, 19,000 USD was drawn out of the profit received by the complainant. When he verified the trading session amount, he found that Rs.4,84,41,476/- was deducted from his account and when he enquired, there was no response. Hence, a complaint was lodged against the present petitioner in this regard.

3. On the basis of the complaint, crime was registered and petitioner, who is arraigned as accused No.1 apprehending his arrest, approached the learned Sessions Judge and the learned Sessions Judge rejected the bail petition. Hence, the petitioner is before this Court.

4. Heard the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned HCGP. Perused the records.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that material amount of nearly Rs.4 crores is already recovered from the other accused and the investment with the present petitioner is only Rs.10,00,000/- that too in a joint account. Hence, he would seek for allowing the petition and also undertake to deposit the amount before the Court.

6. Per contra, the learned HCGP would oppose the bail petition contending that the petitioner not only cheated the complainant and his involvement in cheating others is required to be considered since under the guise of investment innocent investors are being lured and were cheated and only complainant has set the law in motion and number of affected persons are still suffering and that is required to be investigated. Hence, he would contend that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is essential and sought for rejection of the bail petition. 7. Having heard the arguments and perusing the records, it is evident that the complainant was introduced to one Jessie Basa by whatsapp and was invited for investment in his company, Paragon Options dealing with crypto currency platform. Initially Rs.10,000/- was transferred for recharge of account and subsequently, the amount was deducted from his trading account, but the same was not disbursed. It is also evident from the observation of the trial Court that the petitioner is residing in foreign country and moving for the anticipatory bail. When a direction was issued to the learned counsel for the petitioner to produce the original pass port, only a Xerox copy was offered to be produced, but not the original pass port. There is no denial of the fact that the petitioner is not residing in India though he is shown to be resident of Kerala, but when he filed the petition, he was staying Abroad and therefore, the Court has noticed this aspect and held that he cannot assist the investigation by sitting in a foreign country and rejected the bail petition, as he is residing in Dubai.

8. Further, the investigation records disclose that the bank accounts of the present petitioner and other accused disclose transaction of more than Rs.80 crores for which no suitable explanation is forthcoming. Apart from that, the petitioner has successively approached the learned Sessions judge seeking anticipatory bail, but su