Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 57535
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J
AJSAL C.P – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
BAIL APPL. NO. 14339 OF 2025
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Sri.C.K.SREEJITH, SMT.RESMI S.S., SHRI.SASIDHARAN A.N.
For the Respondents: M. K. PUSHPALATHA
Statutory bail entitlement arises when the investigation is not completed within 60 days of arrest as per applicable law.
Headnote:This bail application is filed under section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. The petitioner is accused in Crime No. 279 of 2024, having been arrested on 07.10.2025 for cheating under section 420 IPC, while the investigation has not been completed after 60 days. The Court finds the petitioner entitled to statutory bail and sets conditions for release. The final order grants bail under specified conditions while ensuring compliance.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. accused charged with cheating investors in fraudulent cryptocurrency trading. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. defense claims entitlement to bail due to incomplete investigation. (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. court grants bail with specified conditions based on statutory provisions. (Para 7 , 8) |
ORDER
This bail application is filed under section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘ BNSS ’).
2. Petitioner is the accused in Crime No.279 of 2024 of Varantharappilly Police Station, Thrissur, registered for the offence under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 .
3. According to the prosecution, the accused had, with an intent to make unlawful profit, made the defacto complainant believe that a huge profit can be made through online trading and induced him to invest a total sum of Rs.16,50,000/- in fraudulent sites dealing with cryptocurrency trading during the period from 03.11.2023 to 17.12.2023, and thereby cheated the defacto complainant. Petitioner was arrested on 07.10.2025, and he has been in custody since then.
4. Heard Sri. Sreejith C. K., the learned Counsel for the petitioner as well as Smt. M. K. Pushpalatha, the learned Public Prosecutor.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that till date the final report has not been submitted, and hence, petitioner is entitled for statutory bail.
6. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application and submitted that investigation has not yet been completed.
7. Since, despite the lapse of 60 days from the arrest of the petitioner, investigation has not been completed and the petitioner has been in custody from 07.10.2025, I am of the view that petitioner is entitled for statutory bail.
8. Accordingly, this bail application is allowed on the following conditions:-
(a) Petitioner shall be released on bail on him executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the court having jurisdiction.
(b) Petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required.
(c) Petitioner shall not intimidate or attempt to influence the witnesses; nor shall he tamper with the evidence.
(d) Petitioner shall not commit any similar offences while he is on bail.
(e) Petitioner shall not leave India without the permission of the Court having jurisdiction.
In case of violation of any of the above conditions or if any modification or deletion of the conditions are required, the jurisdictional Court shall be empowered to consider such applications, if any, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, notwithstanding the bail having been granted by this Court.
