The court granted pre-arrest bail, determining that custodial interrogation is unnecessary where the accused had no active role in the core act of forgery, despite receiving funds in their bank accounts, particularly when the investigation is advanced and the accused have no criminal history.

ORDER

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

arrest bail.

2. The applicants are the accused Nos.3 and 4 in Crime No.1415/2025 of Valiyathura Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram District. The offences alleged are punishable under Sections 336(2), 336(3), 340(2) and 318(4) r/w Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short, BNS), and Sections 10 r/w 24 of the Emigration Act, 1983.

3. The prosecution case, in short, is that, in furtherance of the common intention of accused Nos.1 to 4 to obtain wrongful gain and to cause wrongful loss to the victims, the accused No.1 made the victims believe that he would sent them to Madrid in Spain and for that Rs.4,50,000/- each is required for arranging visa, and thereafter, obtained a total sum of Rs.9 lakhs from them by way of Google Pay and account transfer to the account of accused Nos.3 and 4. Thereafter, the accused gave forged visas to the victims, and on 07-11-2025 at about 6.45 PM, when the victims reached Thiruvananthapuram International Airport for going to Spain through Abu Dhabi and handed over the passports for verification, the Emigration Officials found that the visa affixed in their passports are fake. Thus, the applicants have committed the above offences.

4. I have heard Sri.G.Ranju Mohan, the learned counsel for the applicants and Sri.Sanal P. Raj, the learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the case diary.

5. The learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the above crime. The counsel further submitted that no materials are on record to connect the applicants with the alleged crime; hence, they are entitled to get bail. The learned Public Prosecutor, on the other hand, submitted that the alleged incident occurred as a part of the intentional criminal acts of the applicants, and if they are released on bail at this stage, it will affect the course of the investigation.

6. The applicant No.1 is the wife and the applicant No.2 is the brother-in-law of accused No.1. I went through the First Information Statement. The main allegations are against accused Nos.1 and 2. It is seen from the record that accused Nos.1 and 2 handled the visa process and received the money from the victims. A portion of the money was transferred to the accounts of the applicants at the instance of accused No.1. However, there are no allegations that they had any role in the forging of visas. The applicants have no criminal antecedents. The investigation is almost over. Considering the allegations made against the applicants, their custodial interrogation seems unnecessary. For these reasons, I find this to be an appropriate case to grant pre-

arrest bail to the applicants.

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

(i) The applicants shall be released on bail in the event of their arrest on executing a bond for Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One lakh only) each 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 applicants shall fully cooperate with the investigation, including subjecting themselves to the deemed police custody for discovery, if any, as and when demanded.

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

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

(v) The applicants shall not attempt to contact any of the prosecution witnesses, directly or through any othe