Insufficient evidence led to the granting of pre-arrest bail despite serious allegations.

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 applicant is the accused in Crime No.2035/2025 of Thodupuzha Police Station, Idukki District. The offences alleged are punishable under Sections 75 (1)(iv), 78, 79, 351 and 296(b) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 read with Sections 43 , 66, 66(c) of the Information Technology Act, 2000 .

3. The prosecution case, in short, is that the applicant intentionally insulted and outraged the modesty of the de facto complainant. Despite her repeated objections, the applicant persistently followed her, causing severe mental distress. It is alleged that between 25.08.2025 at 10:00 hours and 21.10.2025 at 18:00 hours, the applicant, with the deliberate intention of depriving the de facto complainant of access to her own digital information, unlawfully took possession of her mobile phone and misappropriated the data stored in it.

During this act, he allegedly assaulted her, stating that she did not need the phone, and forcibly removed it from her possession. After obtaining the phone, the applicant has accessed the de facto complainant’s Google Account and unlawfully changed the account password, recovery mobile number, and recovery email ID to his own credentials, thereby gaining exclusive control over the account. By doing so, he allegedly obtained her photographs and personal information and subsequently published her photographs without her consent, with the intention of humiliating and degrading her. The prosecution further alleges that the applicant sought to socially isolate the de facto complainant by repeatedly spreading false allegations and fabricated stories about her, despite her clear objections. It is also alleged that he threatened her and coerced her into sharing her live location, videos, and photographs. Through these acts, the applicant has insulted and outraged her modesty, wrongfully restrained her, criminally intimidated her, unlawfully taken possession of her mobile phone and digital data, and denied her access to her own Google account by fraudulently altering the associated credentials and thereby committed the aforesaid offences.

4. I have heard Sri. K.Ramakumar, the learned senior counsel for the applicant, Smt. Sreeja.V, the learned Senior Public Prosecutor and Smt. Celia Santhosh, the learned counsel for the 3^rd respondent/de facto complainant. 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 applicant is the director of Hybrid Recruiters Private Limited, an overseas education and recruitment establishment. The victim was an employee under the applicant. Admittedly, they were in relationship for long period. Another crime was registered against the applicant at the instance of the victim for the offences under Sections 115(2), 75(1)(i), 76 and 64(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 as Crime No.326 of 2025 of Infopark Police Station, Kakkanad. It is submitted that the applicant has already been released on bail in that case. Thus, there is enmity between the applicant and the victim.

7. The only non-bailable offence alleged in this Crime is under Section 75 (1)(iv) of BNS, i.e., making sexually co