Anticipatory bail should only be granted in exceptional cases after thorough assessment of the case's circumstances, particularly when serious economic crimes are involved and custodial interrogation is deemed necessary.

The application is filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (‘Code’, for short), for an order of pre-arrest bail.

2. The petitioners are alleged to be the accused 1 to 3 in Crime No.214/2024 of the Vengara Police Station, Malappuram, registered against the accused for allegedly committing the offence punishable under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 66D of the Information Technology Act, 2000 .

3. The essence of the prosecution case is that, the accused had advertised regarding an online investment and induced the de facto complainant to invest an amount of Rs.1,08,42,222/- in installments, by clicking on an online link attached to the advertisement, in a portal named ‘ Blackrock Angel One’ during the period from 23.01.2024 to 21.02.2024. Subsequently, the de facto complainant realised that the link was a fake one and was published only to cheat the de facto complainant.

Thus, the accused have committed the above offence.

4. Heard; Sri.K.V. Sabu, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Sri. C.S Hrithwik, the learned Public Prosecutor.

5. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are totally innocent of the accusations levelled against them. They have been falsely implicated in the crime. The petitioners are a fisherman, Bakery worker and NRI, respectively. They had pooled in money and did trade in digital currency through the crypto currency account of the second accused who is doing business through the App called ‘Binance’. The petitioners had sold some digital currency though the above application and earned some profit, which was credited to the first petitioner’s bank account.

Subsequently, the first petitioner received a notice from the Superintendent of Police, Malappuram asking him to appear before the said office. The first petitioner went along with the second petitioner to the said office and their interrogation has been completed. The petitioners are apprehensive that they may be arrested in the above crime. The petitioners custodial interrogation is not necessary and no recovery is to be effected. Hence, the application may be allowed.

6. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application. He submitted that only the first petitioner is the 5th accused in the crime. The petitioners 2 and 3 are only suspects in the crime and have not been named as accused, till date. The Investigating Officer has filed a bail objection report, inter alia, contending that the de facto complainant had clicked on the link of a website named ‘Blackrock Angel One’ on seeing the advertisement in the social media.

He made investments to the tune of Rs., 1,08,42,222/- to 7 accounts as per the instructions of the accused. Out the said amount, Rs.2,84,200/- has been credited to the account of the first petitioner/5th accused. In the investigation conducted till date, it is unveiled that the first petitioner has a total amount of Rs. 9,60,400/- in his bank account bearing No. 11830100287165. The investigation has revealed that the first petitioner is involved in the crime. A report has been filed before the jurisdictioanl Magistrate regarding his involvement. The accused have committed a cyber crime and detailed investigation is required because digital evidence will have to be collected. The first petitioner's custodial interrogation is necessary and recovery is to be effected.

If the first petitioner is granted an order of pre-arrest bail, it would certainly sabotage the investigation.

Hence, the application may be dismissed.

7. On an evaluation of the prosecution allegation, it can be prima facie deciphered that the first petitioner along with the other accused had advertised regarding an online investment in a portal named’ ‘Blackrock Angel One’. The de facto complainant is alleged to have invested a total amount of Rs.1,08,42,222/- in 7 transactions as instructed by the accused. He has been thoroughly cheated by the accused who have not returned t