Delhi High Court Denies Pre-Arrest Bail in High-Profile Digital Fraud Case
Mohit’s plea for anticipatory bail rejected due to serious allegations of digital fraud and the necessity for custodial interrogation.
In a significant ruling, the Delhi High Court, presided over by Justice Amit Mahajan, has denied the pre-arrest bail application of Mohit, an accused in a complex case involving digital fraud, forgery, impersonation, and a financial scam amounting to Rs. 1.75 crore. The case underscores the gravity of digital crimes and the judicial system’s cautious approach towards anticipatory bail in such matters.
The case, originating from a complaint by Rajan George, alleges that Mohit, along with accomplices, orchestrated a sophisticated scam impersonating police officers and using fake court orders to extort money. The complainant was manipulated into believing his identity was misused in a criminal conspiracy involving high-profile individuals, prompting him to transfer substantial funds to the accused’s accounts.
The court highlighted that the investigation is at a nascent stage, with significant evidence yet to be uncovered. Justice Mahajan emphasized the extraordinary nature of pre-arrest bail, which should not be granted routinely, especially in cases involving well-organized conspiracies that require thorough investigation. The court pointed out that custodial interrogation is essential for eliciting crucial information and unraveling the intricate details of the alleged conspiracy.
The prosecution, represented by Additional Public Prosecutor Naresh Kumar Chahar, argued against granting bail, citing the technological complexity of the crime and the potential hindrance to the investigation if the accused were granted anticipatory bail. The prosecution presented evidence, including the location of a SIM card used in the fraud, which was traced to Mohit, corroborating his involvement.
Mohit's defense argued that he was falsely implicated based solely on co-accused disclosure statements, which they claimed were insufficient for his prosecution. However, the court found the allegations and evidence substantial enough to necessitate further investigation without the impediments that anticipatory bail might pose.
The judgment underscores the judiciary’s stance on maintaining the integrity of investigations in cases involving digital and technological crimes. With digital frauds on the rise, the court’s decision reflects a broader need to enable law enforcement agencies to conduct comprehensive investigations free from the constraints that pre-arrest bail could impose.
This case also highlights the challenges law enforcement faces in tackling crimes that exploit technological advancements to perpetrate fraud. The court’s decision ensures that the investigation can proceed unhindered, potentially unearthing the full scope of the conspiracy and bringing all involved parties to justice.
Bottom Line:
Pre-arrest bail denied in a case involving digital fraud, forgery, impersonation, and financial loss due to the seriousness of the allegations, technological complexity, and the need for custodial interrogation to aid the investigation.
Statutory provision(s): Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 Section 438; Indian Penal Code, 1860 Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 170, 120B, 34; Information Technology Act, 2000 Sections 66C, 66D.
Mohit v. State of NCT of Delhi, (Delhi) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2789480
