Cyber Crime Threatens 'Digital Bharat', Factors Like Gravity Of Offence Must Be Evaluated Before Granting Bail: P&H High Court

The Punjab & Haryana High Court has said that while adjudicating the bail pleas, in cases concerning cybercrimes and online fraud, necessitates a "meticulous evaluation of several pivotal factors" and warrants a heightened degree of judicial circumspection.

The Court made the observations while rejecting an accused's anticipatory bail plea after finding a prima facie case against him in cyber crime involving Rs.25 lakhs.

Justice Sumeet Goel in his order said, "while adjudicating the bail pleas, particularly in cases concerning cybercrimes and online fraud, necessitates a meticulous evaluation of several pivotal factors. Paramount among these is the inherent gravity and seriousness of the offence, coupled with its potential societal ramifications."

The Court elucidated that the "proliferation of online frauds and cybercrimes poses a significant threat", as it systematically erodes public confidence in digital financial transaction platforms.
It highlighted that, "Such erosion runs counter to the aspirations of an advanced and digitally empowered "Digital Bharat" and thus warrants a heightened degree of judicial circumspection."

"These offences are characterized by their capacity to aggrieve a multitude of victims simultaneously, often with a single act of commission," the Court remarked.

It added that the gravity of such transgressions cannot, therefore, be understated. "They not only jeopardize the financial security and trust reposed by individuals in financial payment gateways and platforms but also inherently expose the broader populace to analogous threats. Indeed, cybercrime in our nation operates akin to a silent virus — insidious, disruptive, and exacting a toll on society that extends far beyond mere pecuniary loss, encompassing the bedrock of trust, security, and national progress."

The Court was hearing anticipatory bail plea in FIR registered for the offences punishable under Sections 318(4) of BNS, at Police Station Cyber Police Station, Narnaul.

According to the complaint, Rs 25 lakhs were withdrawn from complainant's joint account without his knowledge.

Counsel for the petitioner-accused submitted that the alleged fraudulent transactions took place on or before August 31, 2024, whereas the complainant lodged the complaint on the Cyber Portal only on September 3 and no plausible explanation has been provided for this delay, which casts doubt on the veracity of the complaint.

He added that the instant FIR has been registered against unknown persons and the petitioner has not been named as an accused in the FIR and hence there is not direct allegations made against him.

As per the stand of the State, the petitioner appears facilitated the fraudulent activity by permitting the use of his bank account. Furthermore, during the course of investigation, a sum of Rs.10 lakh was transferred into Union Bank Account, which is registered in the name of the petitioner-accused.

After hearing the submissions, the Court noted that, prima facie, it emerges from the record that the petitioner, in connivance with co-accused, is alleged to have been involved in the commission of cyber financial fraud against the complainant.

It opined that the investigation points towards the active complicity of the petitioner in the alleged offence.

The judge observed that, the nature and gravity of the offence, involving organized cybercrime and financial deceit, necessitate a thorough investigation, which, at this stage, cannot be conducted without the petitioner being in custody.

Considering the inherent nature and profound gravity of such offenses, and their wide-ranging cascading effects on both society and financial institutions, Justice Goel disinclined to grant the relief of anticipatory bail as prayed for.

"To do otherwise would be to turn a Nelson's eye to the profound and far-reaching detrimental impact of these digital depredations. At this stage, there is no material on record to hold that prima facie case is not made out against the petitioner. The material which has come on record and preliminary investigation, appear to be established a reasonable basis for the accusations," it added.

Consequently, the plea for anticipatory bail plea was declined.

Mr. G.S. Thind, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Gurmeet Singh, AAG Haryana.

 Click here to read/download the order