Anticipatory bail denied due to serious allegations of fraud and evidence of potential interference with ongoing investigations.

ORDER:

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘ BNSS ’) by the petitioner/accused seeking anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.21 of 2025 of Cyber Crimes Police Station, Hyderabad, registered for the offences punishable under Section s 66-C and 66-D of the Information Technology Act 2000- 2008 (for short, ‘the IT Act’) and Sections 111(2)(b), 318(4), 319(2), 336(6), 338 and 340(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS)

2. The brief facts of the case are that the de facto complaint lodged a complaint stating that on 29.12.2024, he saw an advertisement in the Instagram regarding work from home with daily salary payment and he clicked the contract and it was redirected to whatsapp No. 9083434166, who told him that they will give daily tasks with daily payment and first they used to send links to give rating and review to the given link and send them screen short and for every screen shot they used to pay Rs.50/- and after three tasks, they used to open welfare task where they asked to invest amount and again they will refund the amount with double profit 30% some times 60% depends on the amount they invest and later they gave another link to in telegram and he followed it, they told to invest money and they created group where almost 250 to 300 members were joined and every one used to get there refund but petitioner did not get refund of Rs.8,41,250/- shown in the app and when the accused insisted to pay more amount to withdraw the money, he realized that it was fraud one and he lost Rs.5,66,701/-. Hence, the complaint.

3. Heard Mr. M. Goverdhan, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Mr. Syed Yasar Mamoon, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent – State.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has not committed any offence and he was falsely implicated in the present crime. Even according to the complaint, there are no specific allegations against the petitioner and as on today, the petitioner is not arrayed as accused in the crime. Hence, the ingredients under Sections 338 and 111(2)(b) of the BNS are not attracted against the petitioner. The imprisonment for the other offences is below seven years. The petitioner is running business under the name and style ‘M/s. Advik Enterprises’. One Mr. Arvind Kumar introduced Mr. Paresh Jaiswal stating that they are interested in investing the funds in the petitioner’s establishment and for that purpose they called the petitioner to Kolkatta and he went there and collected documents including his sim card, attached to Advik Enterpises, bank account details and later the said persons switched off their mobiles and the petitioner immediately blocked the sim card and the petitioner himself lodged a complaint on 01.01.2025 about online fraud before the concerned authorities, however, the concerned authorities have not taken any steps. The petitioner is also victim in the hands of the cyber crimes. The petitioner is having movable and immovable properties and he is not having any criminal antecedents. He further submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to cooperate with the investigation, if any, and also abide by the conditions, which are going to be imposed by this Court.

5. Per contra, learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the petitioner has committed grave offence. The de facto complainant sustained huge financial loss in the hands of the petitioner and other accused to a tune of Rs.5,66,701/-. He further submit