The right to bail is the rule, not the exception, based on the presumption of innocence and the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution.

The application is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 , by the second accused in Crime No.14/2024 of the Cyber Crime Police Station, Thrissur, registered against the accused (two in number), for allegedly committing the offences punishable under Section 420 r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sec.66D of the Information Technology Act . The petitioner was arrested on 9.4.2024.

2. The crux of the prosecution case is that; the accused, in furtherance of their common intention, got acquainted with the de facto complainant through face book and introduced himself as a lady who was working in the HDFC Bank, Hyderabad. The, the accused induced the de facto complainant to deposit money in the bank so as to enable the accused to achieve the target in the bank.

Believing the words of the accused, the de facto complainant transferred an amount of Rs.3,15,000/- between the period from 1.11.2023 to 1.1.2024. However, the accused siphoned off the money of the de facto complainant. Thus, the accused have committed the above offences.

3. Heard; Sri.B.N Haskar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri.C.S Hrithwik, the learned Senior Public Prosecutor.

4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is totally innocent of the accusations levelled against him. He has been falsely implicated in the crime. There is no material to substantiate that the petitioner has committed the above offences. In any given case, the petitioner has been in judicial custody for the last 50 days, the investigation in the case is practically complete and recovery has been effected. Moreover, the petitioner does not have any criminal antecedents. Therefore, the petitioner’s further detention is unnecessary. Hence, the petitioner may be released on bail.

5. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application. He submitted that the petitioner is presently employed in Cambodia. If the petitioner is released on bail, there is every likelihood of him fleeing from justice.

Also, the investigation in the case is at its preliminary stage. Hence, the application may be dismissed.

6. The prosecution allegation against the accused is that they induced the de facto complainant and made him transfer Rs.3,15,000/- to their bank account on the assurance that they would repay the money. However, the accused did not return the money. The fact remains that the petitioner has been in judicial custody for the last 50 days, the investigation in the case is practically complete, the petitioner does not have any criminal antecedents and recovery has been effected.

7. In Sanjay Chandra v. CBI , [2012 1 SCC 40] , the Honourable Supreme Court has categorically held that the fundamental postulate of criminal jurisprudence is the presumption of innocence, until a person is found guilty.

Any imprisonment prior to conviction is to be considered as punitive and it would be improper on the part of the Court to refuse bail solely on the ground of former conduct.

8. In State of Kerala v. Raneef , [(2011) 1 SCC 784] , the Honourable Supreme Court has declared that undertrial prisoners detained in jail for indefinite periods, without any sufficient reason or due to the delay in concluding the trial, will tantamount to infringement of their right to life guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution.

9. The principle that bail is the rule and jail is an exception is on the touch stone of Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Once the charge sheet is filed, a strong case has to be made out for continuing a person in judicial custody. The right to bail cannot be denied merely due to the sentiments of the society.

10. After bestowing my anxious consideration to the facts, the rival submissions made across the Bar and the materials placed on record, particularly taking into consideration the fact that the petitioner has been in judicial custody for the last 50 days, that the investigation in the case is practically comple