Mowleesh G.S. & Anr. vs The State Represented By The Inspector Of Police

The petitioners, who were arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 10.06.2026 for the alleged offences under Sections 406, 409 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860, in Crime No.123 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seek bail.

The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners/accused, acting in conspiracy with each other, induced and lured the de-facto complainant to invest in their business by promising lucrative profits upon joining as a partner. Believing their representations, the de-facto complainant paid a sum of Rs.95,000/- to the petitioners/accused. However, the petitioners/accused failed to return the profits as assured. Instead, they coerced her to enrol five additional members into the company. When the de-facto complainant refused to do so and demanded the return of her money, the petitioners/accused evaded her and dishonestly misappropriated the amount. Hence, the complaint.

The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case.

Dealing with the case of A8 (I.Arunkumar) in Crl.O.P.No.25092 of 2026, the learned counsel submitted that no recovery has been effected from him and he has been in judicial custody since 10.06.2026.

The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) vehemently opposed the grant of bail to A8 (I.Arunkumar), submitting that this is a multi-crore investment fraud involving as many as 141 victims who have been cheated to a total tune of Rs.4,32,31,506/-. He further submitted that A8 (I.Arunkumar) is the brother of A1, who is the CEO of the fraudulent company, and both were actively involved in running the multi-level marketing scam. He also submitted that the earlier bail application of A8 (I.Arunkumar) was dismissed by this Court and there is absolutely no change in circumstances. Hence, he prayed for the dismissal of the petition qua A8 (I.Arunkumar).

Dealing with the case of A9 (Mowleesh G.S) in Crl.O.P.No.24987 of 2026, the learned counsel submitted that he joined the company only in November 2025 and was himself a victim of brainwashing. He further submitted that the alleged main transaction took place up to 22.06.2024, prior to his entry. He also submitted that no scammed money has been credited into his bank account and he has not received any monetary benefit from the alleged transaction. Since he has been in judicial custody from 10.06.2026, he prayed for the grant of bail to A9 (Mowleesh G.S).

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police, and perused the materials available on record.

Insofar as A8 (I.Arunkumar) in Crl.O.P.No.25092 of 2026 is concerned, considering the gravity of the offence, the magnitude of the public money involved to the tune of Rs.4,32,31,506/- affecting 141 victims, the close relationship of the accused as the brother of A1/CEO of the company, and finding no material change in circumstances since the dismissal of his previous bail application, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to him. Accordingly, the bail petition stands dismissed as far as A8 (I.Arunkumar) is concerned.

Insofar as A9 (Mowleesh G.S) in Crl.O.P.No.24987 of 2026 is concerned, considering the period of incarceration, the specific nature of the allegations against him, the fact that no money was credited to his account, and that he received no monetary benefit from the transactions which concluded primarily before he joined, this Court is inclined to grant bail to A9 (Mowleesh G.S) with certain conditions.

Accordingly, the bail petition stands dismissed insofar as A8 (I.Arunkumar) is concerned. Insofar as A9 (Mowleesh G.S) is concerned, he is ordered to be released on bail on his executing 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 Judicial Magistrate-I, Alandur, and on further conditions that:

[a] the sureties shall affix his photographs and Left Thumb

Impression in the Application for Surety ship [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 his identity;

[c] the petitioner/A9 (Mowleesh G.S) shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

[d] the petitioner/A9 (Mowleesh G.S) 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 pass appropriate orders against the petitioner/A9 (Mowleesh G.S) in accordance with law as if the aforementioned conditions have been imposed and the petitioner/A9 (Mowleesh G.S) released on bail 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)13 SCC 283];

[f] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S.