The court emphasized the seriousness of the allegations and necessity for custodial interrogation in fraud cases.

ORDER

This application is filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita , 2023 (for short, BNSS ), seeking pre-

arrest bail.

2. The applicant is the accused No.2 in Crime No.891/2024 of Erumapetty Police Station, Thrissur District. The offences alleged are punishable under Sections 468 , 420 and 406 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code , 1860.

3. The prosecution case, in short, is that the de facto complainant, who runs AARSON INSPIRON Private Limited as an education consultant, was approached by the applicant and accused No. 1, who were conducting FLY ABROAD SOLUTIONS in Andhra Pradesh, with a promise to arrange U.K. job visas. Based on their assurance, the de facto complainant collected money from job seekers and transferred Rs. 2,24,05,000/- to the applicant and accused No. 1. Later, it was revealed that the promise was false and that they had cheated the de facto complainant and other job aspirants. Consequently, the de facto complainant had to sell his property to repay Rs. 1,15,88,500/-. Thus, it is alleged that the applicant and accused No. 1 committed fraud and wrongfully gained Rs. 2,24,05,000/-.

4. I have heard Sri.V.A.Hakeem, the learned counsel for the applicant and Sri.M.C.Ashi, 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. 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 under Section 482 of BNSS could 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 investigation shows that a sum of Rs. 1,52,50,000/- has been credited to the account of the applicant from the account of the de facto complainant.

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/-