IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH, J
SHAMEEMA.K. – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
BAIL APPL. NO. 13379 OF 2025 | CRIME NO.1220/2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. context of the application regarding fraud allegations. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. arguments presented regarding the necessity of bail. (Para 5) |
| 3. court's observation on the seriousness of the offence. (Para 7) |
ORDER
This application is filed underSection 482of theBharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, BNSS ), seeking pre- arrest bail.
2. The applicant is the sole accused in Crime No.1220/2025 of Taliparamba Police Station, Kannur District. The offence alleged is punishable under Section 318 (4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita , 2023.
3. The prosecution case, in short, is that the applicant, with the dishonest intention of cheating, made the defacto complainant believe that if a deposit was made in the jewellery business of the accused, she would get a high profit and, by using that profit, a house would be purchased for her, and accordingly received Rs. 2,00,000/- directly on 12.12.2024 and Rs. 7,00,000/- on 16.12.2024 through account transfer. The applicant has neither returned the money nor purchased a house for her. Thus, the applicant is alleged to have committed the offence alleged.
4. I have heard Sri.K.M. Jamaludheen, the learned counsel for the applicant and Sri.K.A. Noushad, the learned 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. The learned Public Prosecutor, on the other hand, submitted that the alleged incident occurred as part of the applicant's intentional criminal acts, and if he is released on bail at this stage, it will affect the course of the investigation.
6. The law regarding the grant or refusal of pre- arrest bail is well settled. Pre-arrest bail cannot be granted as a matter of course. The power underSection 482ofBNSScould be exercised only when a special case is made out, that too, recording reasons thereof. Perusal of the case diary reveals that the accusation made against the applicant is very serious in nature, and it prima facie shows a premeditated criminal act on his part. The case records would show that Rs. 7,00,000/- has been transferred to the account of the applicant. There is nothing on record to show that it has been repaid. The applicant also has criminal antecedents.
7. The investigation is in a preliminary stage. The custodial interrogation of the applicant is necessary for the investigation. As rightly argued by the learned Public Prosecutor, the possibility of the applicant influencing the witnesses and interfering with the investigation cannot be ruled out if he is released on bail. Considering the gravity of the offence and stage of the investigation, I am of the view that this is not a fit case where the extraordinary jurisdiction vested with this Court under Section 482 of BNSS could be invoked. The bail application is, accordingly, dismissed.
Sd/-
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.