The accused had claimed that he had no knowledge about the amount credited to his bank account.
Mere crediting of an amount in a bank account without any link to a criminal conspiracy, does not constitute an offence, a magistrate court said, acquitting a 25-year-old Jharkhand resident booked for a cyber fraud on a police officer in 2022. The court said that while the bank account details show that an amount of Rs 99,986 was transferred from the victim’s account to the accused, Manoj Kisku’s, there is no evidence linking him to a criminal conspiracy with the main accused.
“Mere crediting of any amount in the bank account of the accused without the evidence of any criminal conspiracy with the main accused, does not constitute any offence. Crediting of the amount in the bank account is from the person or account holder, anyone could deposit the amount with the bank,” S G Chimankar, a judicial magistrate of the Girgaon court said in an order passed on May 20.
On February 26, 2022, the victim, a police officer, had received an SMS asking for her PAN card details to update her HDFC bank account. She was sent a link, which she clicked on. The link took her to a fake website. Nearly Rs 1 lakh were transferred from her account. She also received a call and was asked for an OTP. After she gave the OTP, another Rs 2.99 lakh was transferred from her account. She approached the police, who traced the phone number from which the call was received to a man named Rauf Ansari, a resident of Jamtara in Jharkhand. The investigators said that money from the first transaction of Rs 99,986 was sent to a bank account belonging to one Manoj Kisku and booked him under charges including cheating and forgery.
The accused had claimed that he had no knowledge about the amount credited to his bank account. He said that there was no evidence that he had sent the SMS or had any links to the main accused, who was never arrested.
The court said that the victim suffered a wrongful loss after she had provided her OTP to an unknown person, and the amount was received by the accused. However it concluded that this constitutes civil liability and not a criminal offence, as there is no evidence of the accused’s involvement in the transfer of the amount.