ORDER : Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa, J. The Criminal Petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNSS’) by the Petitioners/ Accused Nos.2 to 4 for granting of pre-arrest bail in connection with Crime No.119 of 2025 of Panjani Police Station, Chittoor District, registered for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 316(2), 318(4), 351(2), 61(2) and 111(2) (b) read with 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant is giving dish connections and the accused No.1 discussed with him and also informed that he would give internet connection and they invested Rs.2,00,000/- each and the accused No.1 opened the account in the name of defacto complainant in Indus Ind Bank, Palamaner and accused No.1 took the ATM card, check book and also connected the said account in to the cell phone number of accused No.2 and later he failed to show the accounts. The further version of the prosecution is that the accused No.1’s wife, brother-in-law, relative Sukesh, and friend Chandrasekhar formed into a group and they lured the people in and around the Rayalpeta on the false promise of providing jobs etc., and collected the amounts and cheated the people. 3. Heard Mr. Siva Nagarjuna Sidhadapu, learned counsel for the Petitioners and Mr. K.Sandeep learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. Perused the record. 4. Learned counsel would further submit that the Petitioners are innocents of the alleged offence and have been falsely implicated by the police. It is further submitted that except Section 111(2) (b) of BNS the remaining all offences are punishable with imprisonment for less than seven (7) years. It is further contended that Section 111 (2) (b) of BNS is not attracted, as there is no legally admissible material to constitute an offence of organised crime and the petitioners are ready to abide any conditions that may be imposed by this Court, and it is urged to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioners. 5. Per contra, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioners, submitting that the investigation is still underway and several material witnesses remain to be examined. It is contended that if the petitioners are released on pre-arrest bail, there is a strong likelihood that they may abscond, thereby hampering the ongoing investigation and evading the process of law. It is contended that if the petitioners are released on pre-arrest bail, there is a strong likelihood that they may abscond, thereby hampering the ongoing investigation and evading the process of law. In view of the foregoing, it is urged that the petition be dismissed. 6. In view of the above submissions, this Court proceeds to examine the applicability of Section 111 of BNS against the Petitioners. Section 111 of BNS reads as under: “111. Organised crime. - (1) Any continuing unlawful activity including kidnapping, robbery, vehicle theft, extortion, land grabbing, contract killing, economic offence, cyber-crimes, trafficking of persons, drugs, weapons or illicit goods or services, human trafficking for prostitution or ransom, by any person or a group of persons acting in concert, singly or jointly, either as a member of an organised crime syndicate or on behalf of such syndicate, by use of violence, threat of violence, intimidation, coercion, or by any other unlawful means to obtain direct or indirect material benefit including a financial benefit, shall constitute organised crime. Explanation.-For the purposes of this sub-section,- (i) "organised crime syndicate" means a group of two or more persons who, acting either singly or jointly, as a syndicate or gang indulge in any continuing unlawful activity; (ii) "continuing unlawful activity" means an activity prohibited by law which is a cognizable offence punishable with imprisonment of three years or more, undertaken by any person, either singly or jointly, as a member of an organised crime syndicate or on behalf of such syndicate in respect of which more than one charge-sheets have been filed before a competent Court within the preceding period of ten years and that Court has taken cognizance of such offence, and includes economic offence; (iii) "economic offence" includes criminal breach of trust, forgery, counterfeiting of currency-notes, bank-notes and Government stamps, hawala transaction, mass-marketing fraud or running any scheme to defraud several persons or doing any act in any manner with a view to defraud any bank or financial institution or any other institution or organisation for obtaining monetary benefits in any form. (2) Whoever commits organised crime shall,- (a) if such offence has resulted in the death of any person, be punished with death or imprisonment for life, and shall also be liable to fine which shall not be less than ten lakh rupees; (b) in any other case, be punished with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than five years but which may extend to imprisonment for life, and shall also be liable to fine which shall not be less than five lakh rupees. (3) Whoever abets, attempts, conspires or knowingly facilitates the commission of an organised crime, or otherwise engages in any act preparatory to an organised crime, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than five years but which may extend to imprisonment for life, and shall also be liable to fine which shall not be less than five lakh rupees. (4) Any person who is a member of an organised crime syndicate shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than five years but which may extend to imprisonment for life, and shall also be liable to fine which shall not be less than five lakh rupees. (5) Whoever, intentionally, harbours or conceals any person who has committed the offence of an organised crime shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than three years but which may extend to imprisonment for life, and shall also be liable to fine which shall not be less than five lakh rupees: Provided that this sub-section shall not apply to any case in which the harbour or concealment is by the spouse of the offender. (6) Whoever possesses any property derived or obtained from the commission of an organised crime or proceeds of any organised crime or which has been acquired through the organised crime, shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than three years but which may extend to imprisonment for life and shall also be liable to fine which shall not be less than two lakh rupees. (7) If any person on behalf of a member of an organised crime syndicate is, or at any time has been in possession of movable or immovable property which he cannot satisfactorily account for, shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than three years but which may extend to imprisonment for ten years and shall also be liable to fine which shall not be less than one lakh rupees.” 7. To bring an offence within the ambit of organised crime, there must be legally admissible prima facie material to show continuing unlawful activity as defined under Section 111 of BNS. The evidence must be gathered first, to make out a prima facie case within the scope of Section 111 of BNS. Without legally admissible accusations, allegations, or evidence, the Police cannot arrest a suspect to collect evidence against him to bring the case into the fold of Section 111 of BNS. 8. A plain reading of Section 111 of BNS indicates that the following essential ingredients must be satisfied: (i) commission of offences enumerated under the provision; (ii) the Accused being a member of an organised crime syndicate; (iii) commission of the offence as a member of, or on behalf of, such syndicate; (iv) more than one charge-sheet having been filed against the Accused within the preceding ten years for cognizable offences punishable with imprisonment of three years or more, and cognizance taken thereon; (v) commission of the crime by use of violence, threat, intimidation, coercion or other unlawful means. 9. In the present case, as admitted by the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, the Petitioners have no criminal antecedents. The Police have registered the present crime including the offence under Section 111(2)(b) of BNS without any legally admissible material to attract the said provision. The Police, based on the complaint given by the complainant, straight away registered the present crime for the offences under Sections 316(2), 318(4), 351(2), 61(2) read with 3(5) of BNS including the offence under Section 111(2)(b) BNS, without there being any admissible material or evidence against the Accused to attract the offence under Section 111 (2)(b) of BNS. Except the offence under Section 111(2)(b) of BNS, the remaining offences, registered in the present crime, are punishable with imprisonment below seven years. 10. Except the offence under Section 111(2)(b) of BNS, the remaining offences, registered in the present crime, are punishable with imprisonment below seven years. 10. In this regard, it is apposite to mention the Hon’ble Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar , (2014) 8 SCC 273 , wherein a detailed guidelines were issued at Para Nos.11 and 12, for arresting a person, which are being reproduced herein below:- 11.Our endeavor in this judgment is to ensure that police officers do not arrest accused unnecessarily and Magistrate do not authorize detention casually and mechanically. In order to ensure what we have observed above, we give the following direction: a).All the State Governments to instruct its police officers not to automatically arrest when a case under Section 498-A of the IPC is registered but to satisfy themselves about the necessity for arrest under the parameters laid down above flowing from Section 41 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for brevity ‘the Cr.P.C.’); b)All police officers be provided with a check list containing specified sub- clauses under Section 41(1)(b)(ii); c) The police officer shall forward the check list duly filed and furnish the reasons and materials which necessitated the arrest, while forwarding/producing the accused before the Magistrate for further detention; d) The Magistrate while authorizing detention of the accused shall peruse the report furnished by the police officer in terms aforesaid and only after recording its satisfaction, the Magistrate will authorize detention; e) The decision not to arrest an accused, be forwarded to the Magistrate within two weeks from the date of the institution of the case with a copy to the Magistrate which may be extended by the Superintendent of police of the district for the reasons to be recorded in writing; f) Notice of appearance in terms of Section 41-A of Cr.P.C be served on the accused within two weeks from the date of institution of the case, which may be extended by the Superintendent of Police of the District for the reasons to be recorded in writing; g) Failure to comply with the directions aforesaid shall apart from rendering the police officers concerned liable for departmental action, he shall also be liable to be punished for contempt of court to be instituted before High Court having territorial jurisdiction. h) Authorizing detention without recording reasons as aforesaid by the judicial Magistrate concerned shall be liable for departmental action by the appropriate High Court. 12.We hasten to add that the directions aforesaid shall not only apply to the cases under Section 498-A of the I.P.C. or Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, the case in hand, but also such cases where offence is punishable with imprisonment for a term which may be less than seven years or which may extend to seven years; whether with or without fine. 11. The similar view is also reiterated by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Md. Asfak Alam v. the State of Jharkhand, (2023) 8 SCC 632 , which also reiterated the guidelines laid down in the case of Arnesh Kumar. 12. In the light of the law laid down in the case of Arnesh Kumar and Md. Asfak Alam, the investigating officer is under legal obligation to proceed in accordance with law, but he shall follow the procedure prescribed under Section 35(3) of BNS/Section 41(A) of Cr.P.C. The petitioners are obligated to render their fullest cooperation in the ongoing investigation. 13. In the result, the Criminal Petition is disposed of directing the Investigating Officer to comply with Section 35(3) of BNS/Section 41-A of Cr.P.C., and to strictly follow the directions issued in the cases of Arnesh Kumar and MD. Asfak Alam.