03 July 2025 Default or Fraud >> Debt Recovery  

In Suhail v/s State of Haryana the High Court of Punjab and Haryana has dismissed an anticipatory bail application filed by a petitioner accused in a significant cyber financial fraud case, emphasizing the gravity and widespread societal impact of such offenses. The court underscored the necessity of custodial interrogation to fully unravel the conspiracy and recover defrauded funds.

Background of the Case:

The case originates from an FIR registered in September 2024 at the Cyber Police Station, Narnaul, under Section 318(4) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. The complainant, Udai Singh, reported unauthorized withdrawals totalling Rs. 25,00,000 from his joint account with his wife at Punjab National Bank. The fraudulent transactions, involving multiple RTGS and IMPS transfers, occurred on August 9 and 10, 2024, without his knowledge or consent, following suspicious calls from individuals posing as bank officials. An online complaint was subsequently lodged.

The petitioner sought pre-arrest bail, arguing that he was not named in the initial FIR and that no direct allegations were made against him. His counsel contended that the petitioner, aged 22, suffers from neurological and psychiatric disorders since 2017 and is unable to manage a bank account independently. It was alleged that a close relative, also a co-accused, exploited the petitioner's vulnerability by opening an account in his name and operating it using his own mobile number, retaining control of banking instruments. The petitioner claimed no knowledge of the funds credited to his account, which was solely managed by the co-accused. He also highlighted a delay in lodging the complaint and asserted that his custodial interrogation was unnecessary as there was nothing to recover from him. The petitioner expressed willingness to cooperate with the investigation.

State's Opposition and Court's Rationale:

Conversely, the State counsel vehemently opposed the bail, asserting the serious nature of the offense. Crucially, the State revealed that a substantial portion of the misappropriated amount, Rs. 10,00,000, was traced to a Union Bank account registered in the petitioner's name.

The court, after hearing both parties, found prima facie evidence of the petitioner's complicity in the cyber financial fraud. The transfer of a significant sum into the petitioner's account, combined with other investigative details, pointed towards his active involvement.

The court stressed that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is indispensable to:

• Unravel the modus operandi of the accused.
• Identify the broader network involved in the fraud.
• Recover the siphoned amount.

Highlighting the increasing threat of online frauds and cybercrimes to public confidence in digital financial platforms, the court noted that such offenses pose a systemic risk to the vision of a "Digital Bharat." It emphasized that cybercrimes impact numerous victims simultaneously, transcending individual financial loss to erode trust, security, and national progress.

Considering the gravity and cascading effects of such offenses on society and financial institutions, the court declined to grant anticipatory bail. The court concluded that releasing the petitioner at this crucial stage could impede the ongoing investigation, potentially leading to evidence tampering or influencing witnesses.

Therefore, finding the petition devoid of merits and deeming custodial interrogation essential for effective investigation and truth-finding, the High Court dismissed the application. The court clarified that its observations are solely for the purpose of the bail application and do not reflect on the merits of the ongoing investigation.

Section 318, BHARATIYA NAGARIK SURAKSHA SANHITA - 2023  

BHARATIYA NAGARIK SURAKSHA SANHITA, 2023