ORDER

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner, who is arrayed as accused No.12 in Crime No.30 of 2026 before the INSP ADMIN (DD) Police Station, Hyderabad, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 318(4), 112, 338 of BNS and 66(D) of IT Act 2000-2008.

2. The brief facts of the case are that on 20.02.2026 the de-facto complainant, lodged a report before the Police stating that he had initially availed a gold loan from CSB Bank at 12% interest. On 10.02.2025, he noticed an advertisement in a newspaper offering gold loans at a lower interest rate of 6% per annum and higher valuation per gram. Upon contacting the numbers mentioned, representatives of Western Finance Limited, including Mr. M.Muthuchamy, visited his residence and induced him to transfer his existing gold loan by promising better terms. Believing their representations, the complainant agreed and pledged gold ornaments weighing 3217 grams (3.217 kg) and obtained a loan of Rs.1,93,00,000/- with a lock-in period of six months. The accused also promised an additional loan of Rs.50 lakhs but paid only Rs.20 lakhs in installments and issued cheques for the remaining amount, which were later dishonoured. After completion of the lock-in period in August 2025, the complainant repeatedly requested return of his gold ornaments by repaying the loan, but the accused postponed the matter on one pretext or another. Subsequently, the office of the company was found closed, and the accused became untraceable. As such, requested the police to take necessary action. Based on the said complaint, a case was registered against the accused for the abovementioned offences.

3. Heard Sri Pasupuleti Sudhakar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner as well as Sri M.Ramachandra Reddy, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent – State.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner, who is arrayed as accused No.12 is innocent of the alleged offences and has been falsely implicated in the said crime and that there is no direct evidence, overt act, or material to connect the Petitioner with the alleged offences, which are based on vague and omnibus allegations. He further submitted that the entire case is based on documentary and electronic evidence, which are already in the possession of the investigating agency, and the Petitioner’s bank account has been frozen, rendering custodial interrogation unnecessary. He also relied upon the judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar and Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra, it is argued that arrest is not warranted in offences punishable below seven years in the absence of necessity and that multiple FIRs on similar allegations amount to abuse of process. Therefore, he prayed the Court to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioner by allowing this Criminal Petition.

5. On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposes the bail application, contending that the allegations against the petitioner are severe and grave in nature, as the petitioner facilitated layering and laundering of illegal money and that the investigation is still pending and that granting of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner, at this stage, does not arise and prayed the Court to dismiss the criminal petition.

6. In light of the submissions made by both the learned counsel and upon perusal of the material available on record, it prima facie appears that the allegations against the petitioner pertain to financial transactions reflected in bank records, which requires a thorough investigation. Though it is contended that the Petitioner has been falsely implicated and was only engaged in cryptocurrency trading through Binance, the record prima facie reveals that the Petitioner’s bank account is