Bail may be cancelled only if subsequent evidence shows misconduct or supervening circumstances, not merely due to the seriousness of the charges; prior lawful consideration by lower courts is critical.

JUDGMENT :

NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA, J.

1. Both the Petitions are being decided together as they involve similar facts and question of law.

CRL. M.C. 7330/2025

2. Petition under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as “ BNSS ”) / Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as “Cr.P.C.”) read with Section 483 (3) / Section 439 (2) Cr.P.C. have been filed on behalf of the Petitioner/State (NCT of Delhi) seeking cancellation of Anticipatory Bail of Respondent, Ankit Jhamb granted vide Order dated 22.04.2025 passed by Ld. ASJ-05, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi in FIR No. 41/2024 under Sections 420 /406/468/471/120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as “ IPC ”), at P.S. EOW.

3. The brief facts of the case are that the present FIR was registered on the Complaint of Mr. Himanshu Shekhar, Authorized Representative of M/s Aviation Service LLC (a Russian Company). It was alleged that in 2022, Ms. Olga Basha, senior official VTB Bank introduced one Mr. Rohit Jain to the Complainant. On 28.11.2022, Mr. Igor Malyshknov, Senior representative of the Complainant Company had a meeting with Rohit Jain regarding providing services to various foreign Companies to do business with India. Upon discussion, Mr. sRohit Jain advised to facilitate the supply of car spare parts and aviation goods through M/s Mangalam Traders, a proprietorship of Ankit Srivastav. A Delivery Agreement dated 30.01.2023 was executed.

4. The Complainant further stated that Mr. Rohit Jain shared the Proforma Invoice of purported supplier’s M/s Impex International FZE and Aerojet Baltic, UAB, as stated to be obtained by Mangalam Traders for rates of the goods as required by the Complainant Company. On the basis of proforma Invoices forwarded by Rohit Jain, believing it to be genuine, the Complainant paid Rs.6,05,99,675.58/. However, no goods were delivered.

5. Consequently, FIR No. 41/2024 under Sections 420 /406/468/471/120B IPC at P.S. EOW, was registered.

6. Investigation revealed that although the Complainant’s account was not maintained with JSC VTB Bank, intermediary transactions totalling to Rs. 6,05,99,625.28 were routed through VTB Bank (PJSC), Russia, between 20.02.2023 and 17.03.2023, as under:

7. Notices under Section 91 Cr.P.C were issued to concerned persons and Banks, namely, Ms. Olga Basha (the then head of JSC VTB Bank), Branch Manager ICICI Bank. The analysis of the account of M/s Mangalam Traders (ICICI Bank, A/c No. 036705501542) revealed that the Current Bank A/c has been opened as proprietorship Firm M/s Mangalam Traders, Proprietor, Ankit Srivastav on 24.11.2021 and closed on 13.10.2023. As per the scrutiny of the statements of the aforesaid bank Account, the information regarding further transfer of funds into the accounts of beneficiaries, have been identified.

8. The analysis further revelated that the cheated amount exceeding Rs. 6 crore, was credited into this Account and subsequently transferred to five entities, including M/s AJ Steel (Account Holder: Ankit Jhamb), M/s RJ Enterprises (Account Holder: Rajbir Singh), M/s BRISK Traders (Account Holder: Himanshu), M/s AV Global Trading (Account Holder: Vishal Oberoi), and M/s Invergise Global Pvt. Ltd (Account Holder: Deepak Kumar, Vinod Maherkar).

9. The analysis of beneficiary Accounts revealed further diversion of funds. The bank Accounts were debit frozen and further beneficiary details are under verification.

10. Notice under Section 41A Cr.P.C was i