Insufficient evidence to link accused to the crime merits pre-arrest bail, factoring in lack of prior criminal record.

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 No.4 in Crime No.812/2025 of Mayyil Police Station, Kannur District. The offences alleged are punishable under Sections 465 , 468, 471 and 420 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short ‘ IPC ’).

3. The prosecution case, in short, is that during the period from 01.01.2010 to 31.12.2024, the applicant, along with other accused, together in furtherance of their common intention of cheating, induced the defacto complainant and received a huge amount by giving an offer of purchase of landed property in his name. The accused had fabricated documents and made him believe that they were original documents and received cash of Rs.61,86,94,149/-. The accused have neither given the land offered by them nor returned the cash received and thereby committed the above offences.

4. I have heard Sri.Luke J.Chirayil, 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. I went through the FIS. There is absolutely nothing in it to connect the applicant with any of the offences alleged against him. The FIS does not disclose any instances where the applicant directly induced the defacto complainant, made any false representation or received any money from him. No specific overt act has been attributed against the applicant except the fact that the properties were purchased by accused No.1 in his name as well. Mere purchase of the properties in the name of the applicant without any proof of active participation, inducement or entrustment would not attract the offences under Sections 420 , 465, 468 and 471 of the IPC . Except the applicant, all others were already arrested. The investigation has reached a substantial stage. The applicant does not have any 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, if any, as and when demanded.

(iii) The applicant shall appear before the investigating officer between 10.00 a.m. and 11.00 a.m. every Saturday until further orders. He shall also appear before the investigating officer as and when required.

(iv) The applicant shall not commit any offence of a like nature while on bail.

(v) The applicant shall not attempt to contact any of the prosecution witnesses, directly or through any other person, or in any other way try to tamper with the evidence or influence any witnesses or other persons related to the investigation.

(vi) The applicant shall not leave the State of Kerala without the permission of the trial Court.

(vii) The application, if any, for deletion/modific