CBI court rejects bail to US-based engineer in cyber harassment and extortion case

Some messages were circulated to over 100 people, including relatives and the complainant’s girlfriend’s family. One email allegedly warned that defamatory content would continue for seven years unless ₹3 lakh was paid

Mumbai: A special Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) court has rejected the anticipatory bail plea of a 35-year-old engineer from Texas, accused of creating multiple fake email accounts of a film industry professional from Mumbai to send obscene, threatening and defamatory messages to him and his associates for extortion.

CBI court rejects bail to US-based engineer in cyber harassment and extortion case

According to the police, the incident dates back to 2022, when the complainant, A.S. Khandelwal, found that a fake Instagram account impersonating him surfaced, sending obscene messages to his contacts. Over the following months, Khandelwal and his relatives allegedly received numerous abusive and threatening emails from several fake IDs. Some messages were circulated to over 100 people, including relatives and the complainant’s girlfriend’s family. One email allegedly warned that defamatory content would continue for seven years unless ₹3 lakh was paid.

Khandelwal then filed a complaint, after which Siraj was booked for forgery, cheating, criminal intimidation, defamation and extortion, under relevant sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and the Information Technology Act.

Subsequently, the CBI’s investigation has revealed that at least 20 email IDs had been created, all of which were linked to one Zohair Siraj’s US phone number. These accounts were used to send obscene content and threats, the agency told the court.

During the hearing on November 17, special judge A.V. Gujarathi held that the CBI had established a strong prima facie case against Siraj and that custodial interrogation was essential for a thorough probe. The court noted that the technical evidence gathered so far directly connected the accused to the device used and the email IDs created. The emails, it observed, contained vulgar remarks not only about the complainant but also about the police, judiciary and political leaders, describing the content as “dirty” and “anti-social.”

Calling the case a “white-collar crime” with indications of possible wider involvement, the court said custodial interrogation was necessary to uncover the full extent of the operation, recover digital devices and identify other potential victims.

An intervener representing the complainant argued that Siraj’s plea was not maintainable since he continued to live abroad and had not submitted himself to the court’s jurisdiction. While the court held that the application was technically maintainable, it noted that before granting anticipatory bail, the applicant must be within the court’s jurisdiction so that bail conditions can be effectively enforced.

The court observed that despite receiving notice electronically, Siraj had neither cooperated with the investigation nor expressed willingness to travel to India. Granting pre-arrest protection in such circumstances could allow an accused to misuse the protection provided by the court, without submitting to Indian law enforcement, the court said, ading that granting anticipatory bail in a case involving such “outrageous acts” would erode public confidence in the justice system.

The court concluded that Siraj had not demonstrated that the case was false or motivated, and that the statutory requirements for anticipatory bail were not satisfied.