Delhi court denies bail to three accused in cyber crime case

A Delhi court denied bail to three men accused of duping victims by posing as law enforcement officers, citing serious cyber crime implications.

A Delhi court has denied bail to three men accused of duping people by posing as law enforcement officers. The court observed that cyber crime is destroying the social, economic fabric of the country.

(Shutterstock)

In an order passed by special judge Rajesh Malik of Rouse Avenue Court on January 8, the court denied the bail pleas of Arihant Jain, Amardeep Sharma and Ankit Jain, saying that the investigation conducted so far had revealed links of the SIM cards with cyber offences and the alleged messages duping clients were consciously sent to cheat the victims.

The court said, “Where a connection is established between the alleged and cyber crime, the court shall be reluctant to give any protection in the form of anticipatory bail to the accused/applicant”.

The CBI’s case, lodged in November last year, stated that certain private entities, including a firm M/s Lord Mahavira Services India Pvt. Ltd., had obtained bulk connections from telecom service providers in violation of the Department of Telecommunication (DoT) guidelines.

CBI claimed that the SIMs were allegedly used to make fraudulent calls by posing as officials of TRAI, law enforcement agencies and other service providers. The agency recorded around 210 complaints involving 189 mobile numbers linked to the firm, causing a financial loss of nearly a lakh to multiple victims.

According to the CBI, Arihant and Amardeep, both directors of the firm, used their firm to obtain several SIM cards illegally through distributors in telecom companies which acted as facilitators. The agency claimed that Ankit Jain signed on the company’s letter heads to obtain the said SIM cards.

“All messages were consciously sent by the accused’s company fully knowing the contents of each message…this court has also seen the nature of messages sent to the public at large and the nature of messages involving approved loans, sanctioned loans and zero documentation, etc.,” the court said.

The accused said that the firm was a telemarketing company where the nature of the work involved obtaining a large number of SIM cards.