Facts of the Case

The petitioner, Rafik Nibisab Mulla, was granted interim anticipatory bail in an earlier order and sought confirmation of that bail in Crime No. 19/2021 registered at the Cyber Crime Police Station, Kollam City, for offences under Sections 419, 420, 468, 471, 34 IPC and Section 66(D) of the Information Technology Act. The prosecution's case was that unknown persons had contacted the defacto complainant through email, falsely informing him that he had won a lottery worth over Rs. 51 lakh, a laptop and an iPhone from a well-known beverage company, and thereby induced him to pay approximately Rs. 8,08,800 towards purported expenses. This is a cyber-fraud/lottery scam case with no GST connection.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether the interim anticipatory bail earlier granted to the petitioner should be made absolute, given that he had already surrendered, been arrested, and released on the interim bail terms.

Petitioner's Arguments

  • Submitted, through the Public Prosecutor on instructions, that the petitioner had already surrendered before the investigating officer as directed, been arrested and released on bail, and was cooperating with the investigation.

Respondent's Arguments

  • No specific opposing submission is recorded against confirming the bail; the prosecution's position was largely confirmatory of the petitioner's compliance.

Court Order / Findings

  • Found that the only allegation against the petitioner was that he had received a portion of the fraudulently obtained amount in his account, with no material showing he had directly contacted the defacto complainant.
  • Considering this, along with the petitioner's cooperation with the investigation, made the interim bail absolute.
  • Directed the petitioner to appear before the investigating officer as and when necessary, not commit any similar offence while on bail, and not intimidate or influence witnesses.

Important Clarification

This is a cyber-crime/lottery-fraud bail matter involving IPC and Information Technology Act offences — there is no GST issue in the case at all, and the order should not be associated with any GST-law question.

Sections Involved

  • Sections 419, 420, 468, 471, 34, Indian Penal Code, 1860 — cheating by personation, cheating, forgery, and common intention
  • Section 66(D), Information Technology Act, 2000 — cheating by personation using computer resources
  • Section 438, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — anticipatory bail (interim order made absolute)

Decision – In Favour of

The petitioner (Rafik Nibisab Mulla) — interim anticipatory bail made absolute with conditions; the order does not decide the truth of the underlying cyber-fraud allegations, which remain for trial.

Case Details

High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam; Bail Appl. No. 6051 of 2023; Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ziyad Rahman A.A.; Date of Order: 22.08.2023.

Link to Download the Order

Click here to view/download the full order

Disclaimer

This content is shared strictly for general information and knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the assistance of AI tools.