ORDER : KAUSER EDAPPAGATH, J. [Bail Appl. Nos.14710/2025 & 14245/2025] These applications are filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, BNSS ), seeking pre-arrest bail. 2. The applicants in B.A. No.14245/2025 are accused Nos.1 to 5 and the applicant in B.A. No.14710/2025 is accused No.6 in Crime No.1216/2025 of Mala Police Station, Thrissur District. The offences alleged are punishable under Sections 406, 409, 420, 463, 465, 468 and 120B read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code . 3. The prosecution case, in short, is that misusing the documents pledged by the defacto complainant in the year 2009 before the Vennur Service Co-operative Bank, Meladur Branch, to avail a loan in his name for his brother, who is arrayed as accused No.6, accused Nos.1 to 6 conspired together and took a loan of Rs.31,50,000/- and misappropriated the same without the knowledge or consent of the defacto complainant. 4. I have heard the learned counsel for the applicants and the learned Senior Public Prosecutors. Perused the case diary. 5. The learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the applicants are innocent and has been falsely implicated in the above crime. The counsel further submitted that no materials are on record to connect the applicants with the alleged crime; hence, they are entitled to bail. The learned Senior Public Prosecutors, on the other hand, submitted that the alleged incident occurred as part of the applicants’ intentional criminal acts, and if they are released on bail at this stage, it will affect the course of the investigation. 6. The defacto complainant is blind. Accused No.6 is his brother. The documents produced in B.A. No.14245/2025 would show that in the name of the defacto complainant, altogether five loans were availed in the years 2009, 2010, 2013, 2015 and 2016. However, the case of the defacto complainant is that he has availed only two loans, those were in the years 2009 and 2015 and both of them were already repaid. The further case of the defacto complainant is that, since he was blind, it was the accused No.6 who was taking care of his affairs and misusing that position; accused No.6 in collusion with the bank employees, availed more loans and caused him loss. The further case of the defacto complainant is that, since he was blind, it was the accused No.6 who was taking care of his affairs and misusing that position; accused No.6 in collusion with the bank employees, availed more loans and caused him loss. However, the documents produced by the accused Nos.1 to 5 would prima facie show that five loans mentioned above were availed in the name of the defacto complainant, out of which, the loans availed in the years 2009, 2010 and 2015 were closed. In respect of the loan availed in the year 2013, ARC proceedings initiated by the bank are still in force. In respect of the loan availed in the year 2016, ARC proceedings were initiated and it was decreed on 30.03.2023. It was thereafter that the present crime was registered. 7. In the investigation conducted so far and from the materials available on record, there is nothing on record to show that the accused Nos.1 to 5, who are the bank employees, have any role in the crime as alleged by the defacto complainant. Their custodial interrogation does not appear to be necessary. Therefore, I am of the view that they can be granted pre-arrest bail. So far as the role of accused No.6 is concerned, it is true that in none of the loan documents produced by the accused Nos.1 to 5, he is a party. As per the documents now available on record, there is nothing to show that he has any role in the five loans allegedly availed by the defacto complainant. However, the defacto complainant has got a definite case that he, being a blind person, his brother, the accused No.6, was taking care of his affairs and misusing the said position, he, in collusion with the bank authorities, pledged his documents again, which were pledged in the year 2009 for availing the first loan, and received the amount from the bank, which was misappropriated by him. In these circumstances, I am of the view that the interrogation of accused No.6 is necessary. In these circumstances, I am of the view that the interrogation of accused No.6 is necessary. In the result, the applications are disposed of as follows:- (i) The accused Nos.1 to 5 shall be released on bail in the event of their arrest on executing a bond for Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One lakh only) each with two solvent sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the arresting officer/investigating officer, as the case may be. (ii) The accused Nos.1 to 5 shall fully cooperate with the investigation, including subjecting themself to the deemed police custody for discovery, if any, as and when demanded. (iii) The accused Nos.1 to 5 shall appear before the investigating officer between 10.00 a.m. and 11.00 a.m. every Saturday until further orders. They shall also appear before the investigating officer as and when required. (iv) The accused Nos.1 to 5 shall not commit any offence of a like nature while on bail. (v) The accused Nos.1 to 5 shall not attempt to contact any of the prosecution witnesses, directly or through any other person, or in any other way try to tamper with the evidence or influence any witnesses or other persons related to the investigation. (vi) The accused Nos.1 to 5 shall not leave the State of Kerala without the permission of the trial Court. (vii) The application, if any, for deletion/modification of bail conditions or cancellation of bail on the grounds of violating the bail conditions shall be filed at the jurisdictional court. (viii) The accused No.6 shall appear before the Investigating Officer within a week from today and shall subject himself to interrogation. After interrogation, if the Investigating Officer arrests the accused No.6, he shall be produced before the jurisdictional court without undue delay. On production of the accused No.6 before the jurisdictional court, if any application for bail is filed, the court shall consider the same, preferably on the same day itself, in accordance with law. The copy of the bail application shall be given to the Prosecutor in advance.