IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS MONDAY, THE 19^TH DAY OF MAY 2025/29TH VAISAKHA, 1947 BAIL APPL. NO. 5926 OF 2025 CRIME NO.1849/2024 OF CBCID, KASARAGOD, KASARGOD AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN BAIL APPL. NO.2115 OF

2025 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA.

PETITIONER:

UDINUR ABDUL RAZAK, AGED 67 YEARS, S/O MUHAMMED HAJI T.K.B. A C HOUSE, BICHARIKKADAV P.O, PADNEKADAPPURAM, KASARAGODE DT, PIN – 671 312.

BY ADV M.MUHAMMED SHAFI RESPONDENT:

STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN – 682 031.

SRI. NOUSHAD K. A. (PP)

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON

19.05.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

BECHU KURIAN THOMAS., J --------------------------------------

Bail Appl. No.5926 of 2025 ------------------------------------

Dated this the 19^th day of May, 2025

O R D E R

This bail application is filed under section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’).

2. Petitioner is the fourth accused in Crime No.1849 of 2024 of CBCID, Kasargode registered for the offences punishable under section 420 of IPC and Section 3 r/w 21 and 5 r/w 23 of Banning of Unregulated Deposit Schemes Act, 2019 (for short ‘BUDS Act’).

3. The prosecution allegation is that the first accused who is the managing director of a company named Fashion Gold International Pvt. (Ltd) which, along with its directors and others, induced the de facto complainant to make an investment in his business by promising a monthly profit share and to return the amount whenever it is demanded. Pursuant to the above inducement, an amount of Rs.11 lakhs was deposited by the de facto complainant on 02.11.2016 and thereafter, though a small portion was disbursed as profit till September 2019, the accused failed to return the amount and thereby cheated the victim and committed the offences under Section 420 of the IPC apart from Section 3 r/w 21 and 5 r/w 23 of BUDS Act, 2019.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Public Prosecutor.

5. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the entire prosecution allegations are false and petitioner has no involvement in the offence alleged. It is also submitted that the petitioner was never in charge of or responsible for the conduct of the business of the company and hence he cannot be roped in under Section 25 of the BUDS Act.

6. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application and submitted that petitioner, along with other directors were responsible for collecting the deposits and for conduct of the business and on realising that the offences were committed by the company and the directors were also responsible, Section 25 was subsequently incorporated. It is also submitted that accused Nos.2, 3, 7, 9 and 11 have already been arrested, and the case is under investigation.

7. Taking note of the nature of the offences involved, it is prima facie evident that, since the deposit taker is a company, the directors who are persons responsible for the conduct of the business are also deemed to be guilty of the offence under Section 25 of the BUDS Act. Since the crime is under investigation and as several crimes have been already registered against the petitioner, I am of the view that this is not a fit case where the petitioner could be released on anticipatory bail. Custodial interrogation is essential to identify the various facets of the crime alleged against the petitioner and other accused. Under such circumstances, I am of the view that the petitioner is not entitled to be released on anticipatory bail.

Accordingly, I dismiss this application.

Sd/-

BECHU KURIAN THOMAS JUDGE

ADS

APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 5926/2025 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure A1 TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.

1849/CB/KNR&KSGD/D/2024 OF CBCID, KASARGODE.

Annexure A2 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPANY MASTER DATA OF FASHION GOLD INTERNATIONAL PVT. (LTD).

Annexure A3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 22-08-2023 IN BA NO.