Arul vs State Rep. By The Inspector Of Police

C.Kumarappan, J

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 16.04.2026 for the alleged offence under Section 318(4) of BNS, 2023 r/w Section 66 D of Information Technologies Act, in Crime No.305 of 2024, on the file of the respondent, seeks bail.

The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant, who is an online trader, has received a whatsapp message for investment in SBIN App and lured by the said message, he has invested a sum of Rs.52,28,500/- on 27.07.2024 to 24.08.2024 and when he attempted to withdraw the amount, he was not able to retrieve the amount and thereby he was cheated and the investigation revealed that the petitioner has cheated the defacto complainant to the tune of Rs.12 lakhs. Hence, the case.

The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He would further submit that the petitioner has been under incarceration since 16.04.2026. He would also submit that the petitioner is ready to abide by any condition that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prays for the grant of bail.

The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) would oppose the bail application, on the ground that the there is no recovery from the petitioner.

From the submissions of the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side), this is a case of online fraud and according to the prosecution, the petitioner has cheated the defacto complainant to the tune of Rs.12 lakhs. Though there is a complaint against this petitioner, admittedly, he is under incarceration since 16.04.2026 and in such type of offences, major portion of investigation might have been completed by this time. Hence, considering the period of incarceration of the petitioner since 16.04.2026 and the possibility of completion of major portion of investigation, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail with certain condition:

Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty-Five Thousand only), with two sureties (one surety must be a blood relative of the petitioner) each for a like sum, to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Poonamallee, subject to the following conditions:

[a] the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the Application for Suretyship [Judicial Form No.46 annexed to 'The Criminal Rules of Practice, 2019']. The learned Magistrate shall obtain a copy of any one of the identity proofs to ensure their identity;

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m and 5.30 p.m until further orders;;

[c] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

[d] the petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

[e] on breach of any of the aforementioned conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions had been imposed and the petitioner released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court itself, as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)13 SCC 283];

[f] if the petitioner thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR may be registered under Section 269 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.