Jackson Nesakumar v. The State Rep.By, The Inspector Of Police,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated : 05.02.2025
CORAM:
THE HON`BLE MR.JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN CRL O.P. No.1881 of 2025 Jackson Nesakumar
...Petitioner/Accused Rank Not Known
Vs The State Rep. by The Inspector of Police, Cyber Crime Wing II, Salem City Cyber Crime Police Station, Salem.
Crime No.38 of 2023
...Respondent
PRAYER:- The Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of B.N.S.S./438 of Cr.P.C., pleased to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of arrest by the respondent police in Crime No.38/2023 pending investigation on the file of the respondent police.
For Petitioner : Mr.M.P.Saravanan For Respondent : Mr.Leonard Arul Joseph Selvam Government Advocate [Criminal Side] 1/6
ORDER
The petitioner/accused, who apprehends arrest in the hands of the respondent police for the offence punishable under Section 66D of the Information Technology Act, 2000, and Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code, in Crime No.38 of 2023, seeks anticipatory bail. 2 (a). The case of the prosecution is that the de-facto complainant was running a business; and that he was introduced to online trading and invested a sum of Rs.1,39,19,320/-, in the account of A1 on the promise that the same would be returned with huge interest.
(b). It is further alleged that some of the amounts credited by the defacto complainant were made in the account of the petitioner, who was not named in the FIR. Hence, the case.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner was duped by A1 and at his instance, he had given the account number to A1 and as and when the amount is credited to his account, he would withdraw 2/6
the said amount and hand it over to A1 and earn a small commission, and he has nothing to do with the online fraud said to have been committed by A1; that the first accused had already been arrested and released on bail; and that in any case, the case is borne out by records, the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required, and he sought anticipatory bail.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for the respondent police confirms the fact that the petitioner only acted at the instance of A1, and he was not involved in the online fraud.
5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.
6. Considering the submissions made on either side, the fact that A1 had already been arrested and released on bail, the nature of the allegations against the petitioner, and since the case is borne out by records, the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required. Hence, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.
7. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the 3/6
event of arrest or on his appearance within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.3, Salem, Salem District, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only), with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the respondent Police or the Police officer who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail shall stand dismissed and on further conditions that:
[a] the petitioner and the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity.
[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police everyday at 10.30 a.m., until further orders. [c] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial. [d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial.
[e] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner released on bail 4/6
by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560].
[f] If the accused thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S.
05.02.2025 dk To 1.The Judicial Magistrate No.3, Salem, Salem District.
2. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.
3. The Inspector of Police, Cyber Crime Wing II, Salem City Cyber Crime Police Station, Salem.
5/6
SUNDER MOHAN. J., dk CRL O.P. No.1881 of 2025 05.02.2025 6/6