Delhi HC denies bail to two accused in ₹2.38-crore cyber fraud case

The complainants alleged that they were defrauded through investment groups on WhatsApp and Telegram operating under the name CHC-SES, which lured them to invest in fake online trading apps.

The Delhi High Court has refused bail to two men accused of defrauding investors through fake online trading platforms, observing that cyber crimes transcend geographical boundaries and can be carried out remotely, leaving victims scattered across jurisdictions.

The accused contended before the court that they were falsely implicated, asserting that they had no contact with the complainants.

The order was delivered on Monday by a bench of justice Ajay Digpaul while hearing petitions, seeking bail in cases registered under multiple provisions of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), including cheating and criminal conspiracy, and sections 66C (identity theft) and 66D (cheating by personation using a computer resource) of the Information Technology Act.

The FIR was based on multiple complaints lodged with the Intelligence Fusion and Strategic Operations (IFSO) Unit of the Delhi Police Special Cell. The complainants alleged that they were defrauded through investment groups on WhatsApp and Telegram operating under the name CHC-SES, which lured them to invest in fake online trading apps and websites. After transferring substantial amounts, the accused allegedly cut off contact and blocked investors’ access. In one case, a victim claimed to have lost ₹29.5 lakh.

The accused contended before the court that they were falsely implicated, asserting that they had no contact with the complainants, were not beneficiaries of the transactions, and that no money trail led to them.

Opposing the bail plea, additional public prosecutor Meenakshi Dahiya, representing the Delhi Police, told the court that the accused induced several victims to transfer money into 24 bank accounts, with a collective loss of ₹2.38 crore. She said the investigation revealed a well-organised cyber-fraud syndicate using forged identities and multiple bank accounts to execute the scam.

Rejecting the plea, the court said, “This Court cannot lose sight of the alarming rise in cyber-crimes and financial frauds across the country... Such offences are not constrained by geographical boundaries and can be perpetrated remotely.” It added that “leniency at the bail stage could risk undermining deterrence in offences that are both trans-territorial and technologically complex.”