Pre-arrest bail granted based on the absence of prior criminal history and no necessity for custodial interrogation.

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.1 in Crime No.921/2025 of Pudunagaram Police Station, Palakkad District. The offences alleged are punishable under Sections 316 (2), 318(4), 336(3) and 338 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita , 2023.

3. The prosecution case, in short, is that the applicant who was the former Manager of the accused No.2, M/s. Muthoot Mini Financiers at Peruvemba, convinced to accept gold ornaments in the name of the defacto complainant, her father and mother by including them in the Smart Gold Loan Scheme at an interest rate of 4% per annum and accepted 901.94 grams of gold as pledge and gave fake receipt by transferring an amount of ₹30 lakhs to the account of the defacto complainant, her husband, father and mother. Out of ₹30 lakhs, only ₹7,40,000/- came to the account of the father from the account of Muthoot Mini Financiers and the remaining ₹22,60,000/- was transferred from the account of the applicant at Dhanalakshmi Bank, Peruvemba and issued receipt for

211.9 grams of gold ornaments in the name of the father. When the defacto complainant asked to return the gold ornaments from the pawn, the applicant did not return the same. Thereafter, the accused returned only 143.750 grams of gold ornaments pledged in the name of the father on the basis of the amount of ₹8,60,000/- transferred by the defacto complainant from her account and her husband's account to the applicant's Dhanalakshmi Bank account. The remaining 758.19 grams of gold ornaments have not been returned to the defacto complainant till date and the applicant pledged the same with Sreenath Finance, Koduvayur in his name for higher amount without the consent and knowledge of the defacto complainant and her family members and thereby committed the offences.

4. I have heard Sri. T.K. Sandeep, 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 above crime. 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 Senior 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 records would show that the gold ornaments were seized and produced before the court. The defacto complainant filed a claim petition before the court and those gold ornaments were ordered to be returned to the defacto complainant on condition that she shall pay the balance ₹25,00,000/-. The records would also show that the defacto complainant has paid a portion of the said amount. The gold equivalent to the said amount was also returned to her. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. Considering the allegations made against the applicant, his custodial interrogation seems unnecessary. For these reasons, I find this to be an appropriate case to grant pre-arrest bail to the applicant.

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

(i) The applicant 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 shall fully cooperate with the investigation, including subjecting himself to the deemed police custody for discovery,