The court differentiated liability between co-accused based on alleged roles and connections to the crime, leading to different bail outcomes.

O R D E R

Dated this the 29^th day of January, 2026 This application is filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, BNSS ), seeking pre-arrest bail.

2. The applicants are the accused in Crime No.689/2025 of Vidura Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram District. The offences alleged are punishable under Sections 3 18 (4) read with 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 .

3. The prosecution case, in short, is that the applicants induced the de facto complainant to part with Rs.2 lakhs promising that they would provide job visa to him at Latvia and accordingly, the de facto complainant gave a total sum of Rs.1,90,000/- to the applicants and thereafter the applicants cheated him without providing visa or returned the amount.

4. I have heard Sri. Aamir Sohrab M.M., the learned counsel for the applicants and Sri. M.C.Ashi, the learned Senior Public Prosecutor. Perused the case diary.

5. The learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the above crime. The counsel further submitted that no materials are on record to connect the applicants with the alleged crime; hence, they are entitled to get bail. The learned Senior Public Prosecutor, on the other hand, submitted that the alleged incident occurred as a part of the intentional criminal acts of the applicants, and if they are released on bail at this stage, it will affect the course of the investigation.

6. The applicant No.2 is the son of the applicant No.1. The applicant No.2 is aged 18 years and he has no criminal antecedents. I went through the FIS. The main allegation is against the applicant No.1. The allegation against the applicant No.2 is that as instructed by the applicant No.1, the de facto complainant transferred a sum of Rs.75,000/- to his bank account. In these circumstances, I am of the view that the custodial interrogation of the applicant No.2 is not necessary and he can be granted pre-arrest bail. However, specific overt act has been alleged against the applicant No.1. Hence, he cannot be granted pre-arrest bail.

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

(i) The applicant No.2 shall be released on bail in the event of his arrest 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 arresting officer/investigating officer, as the case may be.

(ii) The applicant No.2 shall fully cooperate with the investigation, including subjecting himself to the deemed police custody for discovery, if any, as and when demanded.

(iii) The applicant No.2 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 No.2 shall not commit any offence of a like nature while on bail.

(v) The applicant No.2 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 No.2 shall not leave the State of Kerala without the permission of the trial Court.

(vii) The application, if any, for deletion/modification of 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 ARK APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. NO. 14674 OF 2025 PETITIONER ANNEXURES ANNEXURE I A TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO. 0689/2025 OF VIDURA POLICE STATION, DATED 15.12.2025 ANNEXURE II A TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT