Anticipatory bail requires demonstration of changed circumstances or significant grounds; previous denial of bail reaffirms court's position.

ORDER:

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 ( BNS S ) by the petitioner/accused seeking anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.328 of 2025 of Cyber Crimes Police Station, Hyderabad, registered for the offences punishable under Section s 66-C and 66-D of the Information Technology Act 2000-2008 and Section s 111 (2)(b), 318(4), 319(2), 336(6) and 340(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 ( BNS )

2. The case of prosecution in brief is that on 08.02.2025, the de facto complainant lodged a complaint stating that he was automatically joined in whasapp group regarding trading in SMC Company, in which a woman namely keerthi Gupta posed herself as an Assistant and encouraged him to invest the amount on the promise of high returns. Intially, he invested Rs.1,00,000/-. Thereafter, he was persuaded to invest a total of Rs.88,44,000/-. Hence, take action against the persons who cheated him.

3. Heard Mr. G.C. Raj Kiran, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Mr. Syed Yasar Mamoon, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent State.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has not committed the alleged offence and he was falsely implicated in the present crime. Even according to the allegations made in the complaint, the ingredients under Sections 111(2)(b) and 338 of the BNS are not attracted against the petitioner and the punishment for the other offences is up to seven years. The petitioner is not aware of the depositing an amount of Rs.19,20,000/- in his account and he never used the said bank account. The police already freezed the bank account of the petitioner. The petitioner is ready and willing to cooperate with the investigation and also comply with the conditions, which are going to be imposed by this Court. Hence, the petitioner may be granted anticipatory bail.

5. Per contra, learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the petitioner has committed grave offence and the petitioner has received an amount of Rs.19,20,000/- in his bank account on 18.12.2024. He further submitted that the petitioner approached this court and filed Crl.P.No.4790 of 2025 for grant of anticipatory bail with the same grounds and the said criminal petitioner was dismissed on 11.04.2025 and there are no changed circumstances to grant anticipatory bail.

6. Having considered the rival submissions made by the respective parties and after perusal the material available on record, it reveals that the petitioner received huge amount of Rs.19,20,000/- on 18.12.2024 to his bank account. The record further reveals that the petitioner approached this Court and filed Crl.P.No.4790 of 2025 for grant of anticipatory bail with the very same ground and this Court dismissed the said petition on 11.04.2025. The petitioner has not stated any changed circumstances in the present petition.

7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances case as well as the gravity of the offence, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.