The court emphasized the need for custodial interrogation based on the severity of allegations while allowing bail to an applicant with lesser involvement.

O R D E R

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 Nos.1 and 2 in Crime No.711/2025 of Badiadka Police Station, Kasargod District. The offence alleged is punishable under Section 318 (4) r/w Section

3(5) of BNS, 2023.

3. The prosecution case, in short, is that applicants along with other accused in furtherance of their common intention, deceived the defacto complainant, induced her to deposit huge amount in a company named GDCL ensuring good profit and accordingly the defacto complainant has deposited a sum of Rs.34,44,910/- in the account of the company during the period from June, 2024 to October, 2024 but no amount has been returned and thereby committed the offence.

4. I have heard Sri.Godwin Joseph, the learned counsel for the applicants and Sri.K.A.Noushad, 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. A reading of the FIS would show that the applicant No.1 and the defacto complainant were schoolmates. They met after a longtime. At that time, the defacto complainant told the applicant No.1 that, she was having fund with her and she wants to invest it somewhere. The applicant No.1 represented her that she can invest the fund to one GDCL company which would provide a decent profit. Accordingly, she introduced the defacto complainant to the applicant No.2. Thereafter, as instructed by the applicant No.2, the defacto complainant transferred a total sum of Rs.34,44,910/- in the account of three persons including the accused No.3. Thus, the role attributed to the applicant No.1 is that, she only introduced the defacto complainant to the applicant No.2. However, there is a specific allegation against the applicant No.2, that she received the money from the defacto complainant through the remaining accused. Hence, I am of the view that the custodial interrogation of the applicant No.2 is necessary. Since no serious overt act has been alleged against the applicant No.1, I am of the view that the she can be granted anticipatory bail. For these reasons, I find this to be an appropriate case to grant pre-arrest bail to the applicant No.1. In the result, the application is allowed in part on the following conditions:-

(i) The applicant No.1 shall be released on bail in the event of her 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.1 shall fully cooperate with the investigation, including subjecting herself to the deemed police custody for discovery, if any, as and when demanded.

(iii) The applicant No.1 shall appear before the investigating officer between 10.00 a.m. and 11.00 a.m. every Saturday until further orders. She shall also appear before the investigating officer as and when required.

(iv) The applicant No.1 shall not commit any offence of a like nature while on bail.

(v) The applicant No.1 shall not attempt to contact any of the prosecution witnesses, directly or through