[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Kerala High Court
Safwan vs State Of Kerala on 19 December, 2025
2025:KER:98479
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE JOBIN SEBASTIAN
FRIDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2025 / 28TH AGRAHAYANA,
1947
BAIL APPL. NO. 14287 OF 2025
CRIME NO.1266/2025 OF Kannur Town Police Station, Kannur
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 15.11.2025 IN CRMC
NO.1599 OF 2025 OF DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS COURT / RENT
CONTROL APPELLATE AUTHORITY, THALASSERY
PETITIONER/S:
SAFWAN
AGED 23 YEARS
S/O. NISAR, RESIDING AT 'SHARMINAS',
ATHAYAKKUNNU, PULLUPPI, KOUSAR ROAD, KOTTALI
P.O, KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN - 670005
BY ADVS.
SRI.K.ABOOBACKER SIDHEEQUE
SRI.R.MAHESH VARMA
RESPONDENT/S:
STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH
COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN -
682031
OTHER PRESENT:
2025:KER:98479
BAIL APPL. NO. 14287 OF 2025
2
ADV.SRI.G.SUDHEER - PP
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 19.12.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:98479
BAIL APPL. NO. 14287 OF 2025
3
ORDER
The petition seeking regular bail has been
filed by the 1st accused in Crime No.1266/2025
of Kannur Town Police Station, alleging
Commission of Offence punishable under
Section 112(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhitha,
2023.
2. The prosecution case is that, the
accused, who is a holder of an account in SBI
Kakkad Branch had received an amount of
Rs.5,00,000/- through his account as a member
of an organised Cyber Crime. It is further
alleged that, apart from the said amount, on
05.03.2025 he had received an amount of
Rs.7,07,000/- in his account and subsequently he
had withdrawn an amount of Rs.7,000/-. Hence,
the accused is alleging to have committed the
offence as mentioned above.
2025:KER:98479
BAIL APPL. NO. 14287 OF 2025
3. Heard the learned counsel for the
petitioner, K.Aboobacker Sidheeque and the
learned public prosecutor, Sri.G.Sudheer.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner
submitted that, though an offence of organised
crime is alleged against the petitioner, so far,
nobody has been arrayed as an accused in this
case except the petitioner. According to the
counsel, the said facts itself shows that
ingredients to attract the offence under Section
112(1) of BNSS are wanting in this case.
According to the counsel, the petitioner was
arrested in this case on 05.03.2025 and the
investigation in this case is practically
completed. It is pointed out that as the
investigation has crossed its major and crucial
part, further judicial incarceration of the
petitioner will serve no purpose.
5. Per contra, the learned Public Prosecutor
2025:KER:98479
BAIL APPL. NO. 14287 OF 2025
submitted that, this is a clear case of online
fraud and an indepth investigation is highly
necessary to bring all those who are involved in
this case before law. According to the counsel,
the grant of bail to the petitioner at this stage
will certainly hamper the investigation.
Moreover, the Public Prosecutor urged that,
considering the stake of the amount allegedly
grabbed, this is not a fit case to grant bail to the
petitioner.
6. The accusation that the petitioner took
part in an organised crime and grabbed a huge
amount of Rs.12,00,000/- cannot be viewed
lightly. Any how, the petitioner was arrested in
this case on 05.03.2025, and since then he has
been under judicial custody. From the
submission made by the learned Public
Prosecutor, it is gatherable that the accused was
granted in police custody and he was
2025:KER:98479
BAIL APPL. NO. 14287 OF 2025
interrogated as part of the investigation. Even
then, no one other than the petitioner was
arrayed as an accused in this case. As rightly
pointed out by the learned counsel for the
petitioner, the accused is under judicial custody
for the last 49 days. Therefore, there is no
possibility of getting the petitioner in police
custody, further. Therefore, the continued
detention of the petitioner in jail will not serve
any purpose and it could not be said that grant
of bail would hamper the investigation.
Moreover the presence and co-operation of the
petitioner in the ongoing probe can be well
ensured by imposing stringent conditions in this
bail order.
Having regard to the days of detention
already undergone by the petitioner and the
stage of investigation, I am inclined to grant
bail to the petitioner on following conditions:-
2025:KER:98479
BAIL APPL. NO. 14287 OF 2025
1.The petitioner shall appear before the
Investigating Officer on every tuesday, before
the Investigating Officer between 10.am and 1
p.m, till final report is filed in this case or for
six months, whichever occurs first.
2. Petitioner shall execute a bond for
Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One lakh only) with two
solvent sureties each for the like sum to the
satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court.
3. The petitioner shall co-operate with the
investigation and shall not, directly or
indirectly, make any inducement, threat, or
promise to any person acquainted with the
facts of the case so as to dissuade him from
disclosing such facts to the Court or to any
police officer.
4. Petitioner shall not leave India without
permission of the jurisdictional Court.
5. Petitioner shall not commit any offence
while on bail.
2025:KER:98479
BAIL APPL. NO. 14287 OF 2025
6. If the petitioner violates any of the above
conditions, the investigating officer is at
liberty to file an appropriate application for
cancellation of bail before the jurisdictional
court, and if such an application is filed, the
jurisdictional court can pass appropriate
orders irrespective of the fact that this order
is passed by this Court.
Sd/-
JOBIN SEBASTIAN
JUDGE
SLR
2025:KER:98479
BAIL APPL. NO. 14287 OF 2025
APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. NO. 14287 OF 2025
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
ANNEXURE-A1 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED
15.11.2025 IN CRL.M.C. NO. 1599 OF
2025 OF THE COURT OF SESSIONS,
THALASSERY DIVISION.
