Delhiโ High court Denies โคBail in โน1.75 Crore โขDigitalโฃ Fraud Case,โ Highlights Rising Tech Crime Complexity
Theโ Delhi โHigh โCourt recently dismissed an anticipatory bail application filed by โคMohit, accused in โคa sophisticated digital fraud case involving โคโน1.75 crore. justice Amit Mahajan’s decision underscored the increasing difficulty in investigating tech-enabled crimesโ due to theโค misuse of technology by fraudsters.
The case originated from a First Data Report (FIR) โขregisteredโฃ on โฃMay 13, โ2024, with the Special Cell, invoking Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471,โ 170, 120B,โค and 34 โขof the Indian Penal Code, alongside Sections 66C and 66D of theโ Information Technology act, 2000.
According to the complainant, Rajan George,โฃ he was defrauded afterโ being contacted by individuals โขposingโข asโ Mumbai Police officers. โThese individuals โขfalsely claimed a SIM card had โbeen fraudulently issued using his Aadhaar details and linked him to an ongoing โคmoney laundering investigation involving โขJetโค Airways founder Naresh Goyal.
The fraudsters employed โคelaborate tactics, includingโฃ video calls featuring โขindividuals in police uniforms staged in a simulated police โฃstation surroundings, and presented forged documents purportedly from the Supreme Court andโ the CBI.โฃ Through intimidation and โdeception, they coerced George intoโ revealing personal and banking information, ultimately leading to the transfer of โโน1.75 crore to accounts under the accused’s control.
Justice Mahajan noted the intricate nature of โthese crimes, stating they “involve intricate methods andโ multiple โdialog devices and โare used to mislead unsuspecting victims.” The โCourt emphasized the โฃchallenges faced by law enforcement, observingโฃ that such crimes are “on the rise โขand tend to be significantly harder to crack due toโ theโ boon of technology that is effectively misused by crooksโ to wreak havocโ and evadeโ law enforcement.”
the Court declined to grant pre-arrest โขbail, stating that investigators require “fair play in the joints” to โeffectively pursue the investigation. Itโฃ found noโค evidence at this stage to suggestโค the investigation was โคmotivated by maliceโข or that Mohit had been falselyโ implicated.
While dismissing the bail application, Justice Mahajan clarified that the observations made were solely for the purposeโข of โdeciding the bail plea and shoudl not prejudice the outcome of the trialโฃ or โbe interpreted as an opinion on the case’s merits.
Case Title: Mohit vs State of NCT of Delhi
bench: Justice amit Mahajan
Date โขof Order: โฃ September 25, โฃ2025