The accused has an indefeasible right to be released on bail under Section 167(2) of CrPC if the investigation is not completed and the final report is not filed within the prescribed period.

The application is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure by the 3rd accused in Crime No.82/2024 of the Cyber Crime Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram, which is registered against the accused for allegedly committing the offences punishable under Sections 419 and 420 r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 66D of the Information Technology Act . The petitioner was arrested on 19.04.2024.

2. The gravamen of the prosecution case is that: the accused, in furtherance of their common intention, had induced the defacto complainant to make investments in an online international gold trading on the assurance that he would be given profit.

Accordingly, the defacto complainant transferred Rs.37,46,880/- in various bank accounts from 04.02.2024 as instructed by the accused. However, the accused did not pay any profit or return the capital.

Thus, the accused have committed the above offences.

3. Heard; Sri.T.S.Sarath, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Smt.Neema T.V., the learned Public Prosecutor.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is totally innocent of the accusations leveled against him. There is no material to substantiate the petitioner's involvement in the case. The petitioner has been in judicial custody for the last 62 days, the investigation in the case is not complete and the final report has not been laid. Hence, the petitioner is entitled to statutory bail as contemplated under Section 167 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure . Therefore, the application may be allowed.

5. The learned Public Prosecutor seriously opposed the application. She submitted that the petitioner has committed a grave economic offence. If the petitioner is released on bail, there is every likelihood of him committing similar offence. Nonetheless, she did not dispute the fact that the offences alleged against the petitioner are all punishable for a period of less than ten years, the investigation in the case is not complete and the final report has not been laid.

6. The prosecution allegation against the accused is that, the accused in furtherance of their common intention had cheated the defacto complainant by assuring him profit on his investment. Even though the defacto complainant transferred Rs.37,46,880/-, to the accused, they did not pay him any profit or return the capital. The fact remains that the petitioner has been arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 19.04.2024 which is more than 60 days, the investigation in the case is not complete and the final report has not been laid even after the period of 60 days.

7. Subsection (2) of Section 167 of the Code of Criminal Procedure , 1973 reads as follows:-

167. Procedure when investigation cannot be completed in twenty-four hours.—

(1) Whenever any person is arrested and detained in custody, and it appears that the investigation cannot be completed within the period of twenty-four hours fixed by section 57, and there are grounds for believing that the accusation or information is wellfounded, the officer in charge of the police station or the police officer making the investigation, if he is not below the rank of sub-inspector, shall forthwith transmit to the nearest Judicial Magistrate a copy of the entries in the diary hereinafter prescribed relating to the case, and shall at the same time forward the accused to such Magistrate.

(2) The Magistrate to whom an accused person is forwarded under this section may, whether he has or has not jurisdiction to try the case, from time to time, authorise the detention of the accused in such custody as such Magistrate thinks fit, for a term not exceeding fifteen days in the whole; and if he has no jurisdiction to try the case or commit it for trial, and considers further detention unnecessary, he may order the accused to be forwarded to a Magistrate having such jurisdiction:

Provided that— 2 [(a) the Magistrate may authorise the detention of the accused person, otherwis