SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 731

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH, J
MUHAMMED MIDLAJ – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
BAIL APPL. NO. 13959 OF 2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SHRI.AMAL PARTHASARADHY, SRI.GIBI.C.GEORGE
For the Respondents: SMT.M.K.PUSHAPALATHA

Statutory bail granted due to prolonged custody under section 483, balancing investigation needs and rights of the accused.

Headnote:The application arises under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking regular bail for the applicant accused of fraud under Section 420 IPC and Section 66D of IT Act. The court found that the applicant, remanded since 06.11.2025, meets the conditions for statutory bail due to prolonged judicial custody. The main issues were the alleged connection of the applicant to the crime and the assessment of the evidence indicating innocence. The court concluded allowing bail, subject to specific conditions to ensure cooperation with the investigation and prevent further offenses.

Table of Content
1. application for bail under statutory provisions. (Para 1 , 2)
2. court's assessment and bail granted. (Para 4)

O R D E R

This application is filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, BNSS ), seeking regular bail.

2. The applicant is the accused No.2 in Crime No.6/2024 of Cyber Crime Police Station, Thrissur District. The offences alleged are punishable under Section 420 of IPC and Section 66D of IT (Amendment) Act, 2008.

3. The prosecution case, in short, is that during

16.01.2024 to 21.01.2024, the accused with the intention to swindle money from the defacto complainant, offered him an online job and for that purpose, accused sent messages and his telegram account details for payment. It is alleged that as per the directions of the accused, the defacto complainant conducted various prepaid tasks and review tasks and had sent a total amount of Rs 5,28,000/-(Rupees Five Lakhs Twenty Eight Thousand only) from his various bank accounts to the accused. But the accused deceived the defacto complainant by not paying any remuneration for his online task and thereby committed the offences.

4. I have heard Sri.Amal Parthasaradhy, the learned counsel for the applicant and Smt.M.K.Puahpalatha, the learned Senior Public Prosecutor. Perused the case diary. 5. The learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The counsel further submitted that no materials are on record to connect the applicant with the alleged crime; hence, he is entitled to bail. On the other hand, the learned Senior Public Prosecutor submitted that the alleged incident occurred as a part of the intentional criminal acts of the applicant, and he is not entitled to bail at this stage.

6. The applicant was remanded to judicial custody on

06.11.2025. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that investigation is continuing. Since more than 60 days have elapsed from the date of arrest of the applicant, he is entitled for statutory bail. For these reasons, I do not find any reason to hold that the continued detention of the applicant is required for any purpose. Hence, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

In the result, the application is allowed on the following conditions: -

(i) The applicant shall be released on bail on executing a bond for Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One lakh only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Magistrate/Court.

(ii) The applicant shall fully co-operate with the investigation.

(iii) The applicant shall appear before the investigating officer between 10.00 a.m and 11.00 a.m. every Saturday until further orders. He shall also appear before the investigating officer as and when required.

(iv) The applicant shall not commit any offence of a like nature while on bail.

(v) The applicant shall not attempt to contact any of the prosecution witnesses, directly or through any other person, or in any other way try to tamper with the evidence or influence any witnesses or other persons related to the investigation.

(vi) The applicant shall not leave the State of Kerala without the permission of the trial Court.

(vii) The application, if any, for deletion/modification of the bail conditions or cancellation of bail on the grounds of violating the bail conditions shall be filed at the jurisdictional court.

Sd/-

DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH, JUDGE APA APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. NO. 13959 OF 2025 PETITIONER ANNEXURES ANNEXURE A1 COPY OF F.I.R. IN CRIME NO.0006/2024 REGISTERED BY THE CYBER CRIME POLICE STATION THRISSUR RURAL ANNEXURE A2 COPY OF ORDER DATED 14-11-2025 PASSED BY THE JFCM, IRINJALAKUDA ANNEXURE A3 COPY OF THE HALL TICKET OF THE ACCUSED ALONG WITH THE EXAM TIMETABLE

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top