P&H High Court Grants Bail to Bank Employee in Rs. 1.03 Crore "Digital Arrest" Scam

Chandigarh: The Punjab and Haryana High Court has granted regular bail to a bank's relationship manager implicated in a sophisticated "digital arrest" scam that defrauded a woman of over Rs. 1 crore. Justice Vinod S. Bhardwaj granted relief to the petitioner, Shaik Noushad Ahammed, citing his clean criminal record, the lack of direct recovery from him, and the fact that similarly placed co-accused had already been granted bail.

The 'Digital Arrest' Scam

The case originates from an FIR filed on June 11, 2025, based on a complaint by Charanjit Kaur. The complainant reported that she was targeted by fraudsters posing as police officers from "Police Station Colaba, Maharashtra." They contacted her via WhatsApp video call, claiming that fake bank accounts had been opened using her Aadhar card to commit financial fraud.

Under the threat of imminent physical arrest, the fraudsters placed her under "digital arrest," forcing her to remain on a continuous video call. The background was manipulated to resemble a police station. Over several days, they coerced her into transferring a total of Rs. 1.03 crore into various bank accounts they provided, under the pretext of account verification. She realized she had been duped only after visiting her local police station in Mohali.

Arguments Before the Court

Petitioner's Counsel: The petitioner, Shaik Noushad Ahammed, was arrested based on the disclosure statement of a co-accused. It was alleged that he, in his capacity as a Relationship Manager, facilitated the opening of a fraudulent bank account where a portion of the scammed money (Rs. 57 lakh) was deposited.

His counsel argued that: - His role was limited to facilitating the account opening process; the verification of KYC documents was handled by a separate back-end team. - There was no evidence to suggest he forged documents or personally benefited from the transaction. - No money was recovered from him. - The co-accused, on whose statement he was implicated, had already been granted bail, establishing grounds for parity. - The petitioner has no prior criminal history.

State's Counsel: The prosecution countered that the petitioner assisted in opening an account for a "fictitious person" without proper verification. However, the State could not produce any standard procedure or rule to establish that the primary responsibility for KYC document verification lay with the Relationship Manager. The State also did not dispute that other co-accused had been released on bail.

Court's Rationale for Granting Bail

In his order, Justice Vinod S. Bhardwaj highlighted several key factors justifying the grant of bail. The court observed that the petitioner's role and responsibility in the verification process were "arguable issues" to be determined during the trial.

The judgment noted:

> "Taking into consideration the arguments noticed above and the clean antecedents of the petitioner, absence of recovery, the arguable issues with respect to the role and responsibility of the petitioner as also the fact that further custodial detention of the petitioner is not warranted for investigation of the present case, I deem it appropriate to enlarge the petitioner on regular bail..."

The court also considered the principle of parity, given that other accused persons, including the one who named the petitioner, were already out on bail.

Final Decision and Conditions

The High Court allowed the petition, ordering the release of Shaik Noushad Ahammed on regular bail upon furnishing the requisite bail bonds. The court imposed a condition that the petitioner shall not threaten or influence any prosecution witnesses. The observations made in the order were clarified to be for the purpose of the bail hearing only and will not influence the final merits of the case during the trial.