Udumula Krishna Reddy vs State Of Jharkhand

Ananda Sen, J.

Heard the parties.

This anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, has been preferred by the petitioner apprehending his arrest for offences under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B IPC.

It is alleged that the informant while scrolling the mobile received a WhatsApp message from where she could learnt that if she trades in shares etc., the amount which she invests will get double and she can earn money. She expressed her willingness thus she was admitted in a WhatsApp group. She was provided an online account number and password. The Company which was handling this is Apollo Global Management INC. It is stated that the informant invested huge amount of Rs.98,60,000/-. Further, in the F.I.R., it has been mentioned that several other persons have also deposited huge amount. It is alleged that she received Rs.19 lacs, also and she was talking to one Arunima who was communicating on behalf of the said Company. She lastly alleged that she has been cheated by the said Company, as she did not get the returns and the balance amount has been misappropriated.

Learned senior counsel representing the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a businessman, having coal business and he has got no criminal antecedent. He submits that there is no transaction in Bank account between the petitioner and any of the victims. He submits that the petitioner has only helped the main accused - Makireddy Sujeeth Kumar, long back in opening a Bank account. He submits that the date of occurrence is 12.04.2024 to 16.05.2024 and some fringe transfer of Rs.5,000/-and odd is tried to be linked with the crime without any evidence, which was deposited on 23.05.2024 and which is beyond the period of occurrence i.e. 12.04.2024 to 16.05.2024 and that too not by any victim. By placing reliance on para-25 of the supplementary case diary, learned senior counsel submits that there is no transaction from the account of Appollo Global Management to the account of this petitioner. Learned senior counsel lastly submits that the petitioner is thoroughly innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. Thus, he may be enlarged on anticipatory bail.

Per contra, learned A.P.P. representing the State and learned counsel representing the informant oppose the prayer for anticipatory bail. Learned A.P.P. representing the State by placing reliance on para-26 of the case diary, submits that there are WhatsApp chats between the parties. He further submits that this petitioner was operating the account of Makireddy Sujeeth Kumar as he has taken the kit of the said account and was operating the same from Dubai. Learned counsel representing the informant submits that the entire amount has been paid in the account of Appollo Global Management. Para-130 of the case diary indicates that Makireddy Sujeeth Kumar is the account holder of the Bank Account bearing No.-0028104000490009, in which Rs.32,000/-was deposited by one Krishna Reddy. It is also clear from the said paragraph of the case diary that a new passport has been issued to Sujeeth Kumar after the old one expired and it has not been recovered. Further, from para-131, it can be revealed that the IP address has been scrutinized which indicated the bank account to be operated from Dubai.

As per learned A.P.P. and learned counsel representing the informant, the Bank Accounts were clandestinely being operated by this petitioner and that too from Dubai, as the entire Bank kit of Makireddy Sujeeth Kumar, was taken by this petitioner to Dubai and he was handling the same. Learned A.P.P. after going through the case diary, submits that there are materials to suggest that the I.P. address from which the same was being operated was from Dubai, which suggests that this petitioner has hands in the occurrence. A lookout notice was also issued against the petitioner.

On perusal of the F.I.R., the fact which appears is that the informant claimed to have invested Rs.98,60,000/- in trading and she has been paid back Rs.19 lacs through IMPS. Further, the relatives of the informant has also invested. The main allegation is that in the name of trading and investment, they have been cheated. From the F.I.R. and the document and the case diary, I find that there is nothing to suggest that the informant or others have paid money to this petitioner. As per the case diary, the Police has found material that it is this petitioner who helped the main accused namely Makireddy Sujeeth Kumar in opening the Bank Accounts.

Further, I find that admittedly neither the informant nor others had paid any money to this petitioner. The case diary reveals that Makireddy Sujeeth Kumar is the account holder of the Bank Account bearing No.-0028104000490009, in which Rs.32,000/- was deposited. The State and the informant have tried to setup a case that it is this petitioner who was operating the accounts of the main accused - Makireddy Sujeeth Kumar, as he was instrumental in opening the Bank account of Makireddy Sujeeth Kumar and has taken the kit to Dubai and was operating from there.

Considering the nature of transactions, specially that no amount was transferred in the account of this petitioner nor there is any inter-se transaction between Makireddy Sujeeth Kumar, and this petitioner, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to this petitioner.

Accordingly, this  Anticipatory Bail  Application  stands allowed. The petitioner, above named, is directed to surrender before the learned court below within four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order and on the event of his surrender or arrest, he shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand), with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned Additional Judicial Commissioner-II-cum-Spl. Judge, Cyber Crime, Ranchi, in connection with Cyber P.S. Case No.140 of 2024, subject to the following conditions:-

i. One of the bailers should be a close relative of the petitioner, having sufficient landed property in his own name.

ii. The petitioner has to appear before the Investigating Officer once in every fifteen days till conclusion of the investigation and cooperate with the same.

iii. The petitioner should deposit his passport before the Court, where he will furnish his bail bond.

iv. The petitioner will also file an undertaking that if charge-sheet is filed against the petitioner, he will cooperate in conclusion of the trial without lingering the same.

If any of the aforesaid conditions is violated, it will be open to the Court or the Investigating Officer to take appropriate action including steps to cancel the bail of the petitioner.