‘Cybercrime syndicate needs to be taken down as a whole’

Manjeet disclosed that on July 11, she received an anonymous call where the caller informed her a mobile number — issued in her name — was involved in suspected activities and money laundering.

The complainant then received a WhatsApp call, where the caller introduced himself as Sunil and claimed that he is a CBI officer. He told her that an account in ICICI Bank had been opened in her name, which she used to receive money connected to a money laundering scam. She further alleged of using that account in various criminal activities. When the complainant denied all these, the caller shared with her an image of ICICI bank passbook which reflected her name as an account holder and said that her Aadhaar number was used for opening the alleged account.

On continuous denial of the complainant, the caller suggested her to follow his instructions to get a clean chit. The caller further shared a copy of a letter with stamps mentioning “Government of India” on it and forced her to share her bank account details to verify them. Later on, the caller asked the complainant to deposit her whole amount in their safe custody accounts. On his instructions, the complainant deposited her whole amount approximately Rs 1.01 crore in various bank accounts. Later, she realised that she had been duped through a cyber fraud scam.

The defence counsel argued that the accused, Shah, has been falsely implicated, and has no direct role in the creation of fake profiles or fraud, and that he merely dealt in accounts without participating in the actual fraud, and is willing to cooperate, abide by bail conditions, and give an undertaking to not tamper with the evidence.

The Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application stating that during interrogation co-accused Vijay disclosed that his POS ID was activated by Abhijeet, which was given to Shah as an agent. Shah used his POS ID for the activation of SIM cards. Also, the prosecutor contended that Shah is “highly cunning and resourceful” and may hamper the investigation, allure the witnesses and hinder the arrest of other accused persons.

The court on hearing the matter held that such cases are increasing by the day and have serious repercussions on the society as a whole.

“Cybercrimes cannot be equated to ordinary crimes under IPC or other such penal laws. Such crimes are committed by persons who are educated and well conversant with technology —  hacking systems, forging records, fabricating accounts, siphoning funds — and all these persons may be sitting in different locations in the country. While some may be mere small beneficiaries, it does not make them innocent. Such a cartel/syndicate needs to be taken down as a whole,” it said.

The court said that custodial interrogation in such cases is necessary to keep a check on the increasing number of cyber frauds in the country, which have brought disrepute to the nation.

“If bail is granted to any person involved in such a case, it will give a wrong message to the public at large and will boost the morale of similar culprits, who cheat innocent persons. One of the factors to be kept in mind while granting bail is the interest of the society. The interest of the society will not be served if the accused is admitted to bail in the present case,”the court held as it rejected the bail plea.