The court emphasized that custodial interrogation is vital for effective investigation, and granted bail would impede the investigative process.

O R D E R

This bail application is filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’). 2. Petitioner is the accused in Crime No.349 of 2024 of Vakathanam Police Station, Kottayam, registered for the offences punishable under sections 420 and 406 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short ‘ IPC ’), apart from Section 66D of the Information Technology Act, 2000 (for short ‘IT Act’). Petitioner has been issued with a notice under Section 35(3) of BNSS for appearance before the Investigating Officer on 03.07.2025. However, without appearing before the Investigating Officer, the Petitioner has approached this Court with this anticipatory bail application.

3. The prosecution alleges that the accused had cheated the de facto complainant of a large amount of money. During the course of investigation, the involvement of the petitioner in the crime has been identified, and he has been asked to appear for ascertaining certain facts and circumstances relating to the credit and debit of amounts into his account.

4. I have heard Sri.Denizen Komath., the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Smt.Sreeja V., the learned Public Prosecutor.

5. Petitioner’s account was credited with Rs.30,000/- on two occasions and immediately thereafter he is alleged to have withdrawn the amount. Petitioner contends that the amount was transferred and withdrawn at the request of a friend based in Thailand. Though petitioner claims innocence, the Investigating Officer has sought his appearance especially since the involvement of a foreign national has been identified. Since there are materials collected to doubt the involvement of the petitioner, at this stage of the proceedings, if the petitioner is protected with an order of pre arrest bail, the investigation will be prejudiced.

6. In a recent decision in P. Krishna Mohan Reddy vs. The State of Andhra Pradesh ( 2025 LiveLaw SC 598 ) the Supreme Court had observed that custodial interrogation is qualitatively more elicitation oriented than questioning a suspect who is well ensconced with a favourable order of pre-arrest bail. It was also observed that success in interrogation will elude if the suspected person knows that he is well protected and insulated by a pre-arrest bail order during the time he is interrogated. In fact, the court went on to hold that insulating a person from arrest would make his interrogation a mere ritual

7. Having regard to the above circumstances and also the nature of allegations, I am of the view that petitioner cannot be protected with an order of pre-arrest bail.

Hence, this bail application is dismissed. However, if in case petitioner surrenders before the Investigating Officer on 07.08.2025, he shall be subjected to interrogation. Thereafter, if in case he is arrested, he shall be produced before the jurisdictional Court without delay. If any application for bail is filed, the same shall also be considered in accordance with law, preferably on the day itself.