The absence of substantial evidence against the applicant substantiates the grant of bail despite the allegations of fraud.

O R D E R

These six bail applications are connected and hence they are disposed of by a common order. They are filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, BNSS ), seeking regular bail.

2. The applicant in all the bail applications is one and the same. B.A.No. 3 of 2026 pertains to Crime No. 918 of 2025 and B.A.No. 4 of 2026 pertains to Crime No. 1307 of 2025 of Chengannur Police Station, Alappuzha District. B.A.No. 23 of 2026 pertains to Crime No. 796 of 2025, B.A.No. 24 of 2026 pertains to Crime No. 805 of 2025, B.A.No. 27 of 2026 pertains to Crime No. 806 of 2025 and B.A.No. 28 of 2026 pertains to Crime No. 815 of 2025 of Panniankara Police Station, Kozhikode District. The applicant is accused No.1 in Crime No. 918 of 2025 and sole accused in all the remaining crimes.

3. The offences alleged in Crime No. 918 of 2025 are punishable under Section 3 18 (4) read with (5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short, 'the BNS'). The offences alleged in Crime No. 1307 of 2025 are punishable under 18 (4) of the BNS and Sections 4 and 22 of the Banning of Unregulated Deposit Schemes Act, 2019 . The offences alleged in Crime No. 796 of 2025 are punishable under Sections 3 16(2) and 318(4) of the BNS. The offence alleged in Crime Nos. 805 of 2025, 806 of 2025 and 815 of 2025 is punishable under 18 (4) of the BNS

4. The prosecution case in all the cases is that the applicant being the Managing Director of Nedumparambil Nidhi Limited induced the defacto complainants therein to deposit amounts promising interest and thereafter cheated them without giving interest as promised or returning the amount invested and thereby committed the offences.

5. I have heard Sri.Naveen Thomas, the learned counsel for the applicant and Sri.M.C.Ashi, Sri.U.Jayakrishnan and Smt. M.K.Pushpalatha, the learned Public Prosecutors. Perused the case diary.

6. 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 Public Prosecutors 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.

7. The applicant was formally arrested in Crime Nos.918 and 1307 of 2025 on 01.12.2025, in Crime No. 796 of 2025 on 26.12.2025 and in Crime Nos. 805, 806 and 815 of 2025 on 30.12.2025. The investigation is almost over. In a connected crime (Crime No.889 of 2025) while dismissing the bail application moved by the applicant, the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Ernakulam has observed that there is no allegation that the applicant has dishonestly induced the defacto complainant's husband to invest the money in the company and there is also no allegation that the company does not have license from Reserve Bank of India to collect deposits from public. It was further found that the remand report does not prima-facie suggest that the applicant had intention to cheat the defacto complainant from the very inception. 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 applications are 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) each in each case with two solvent sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the ju