In cyber fraud cases where a bank account is used to route defrauded funds, the claim of account misuse is a matter for investigation, and bail may be denied based on the gravity of the offence and the necessity of tracing the money trail.

ORDER

This Criminal Petition is filed praying this Court to enlarge the petitioner on bail who is arrayed as accused No.5 in Crime No.521 of 2026 before the Cyber Crimes Police Station, Cyberabad Commissionerate, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 319(2), 336(3), 338, 340(2) read with 3(5) of BNS and Section 66-D of IT Act-2000-2008.

2. The brief facts of the case are that on 24.03.2026, a complaint was lodged alleging that the complainant was cheated through a fraudulent online trading platform after being induced by unknown persons through social media and messaging applications. It is alleged that the complainant transferred a total amount of Rs.6,60,000/- to various bank accounts on the promise of high returns, but was later unable to withdraw the funds and realized that it was a fraud. Based on the complaint, a case in Crime No.521 of 2026 was registered for offences under the relevant provisions of the BNS and Section 66-D of the IT Act. During investigation, the petitioner was arrayed as Accused No.5 on the ground that his bank account was allegedly used in the commission of the offence.

3. Heard Smt. Sneha Bachanaboina, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner as well as Sri M. Ramachander Reddy, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent – State.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated, and he was not even named in the FIR initially but was later arrayed as Accused No.5 and that the petitioner is not connected with the alleged fraud and is himself a victim, as his bank account was misused by unknown persons after he shared his account credentials under the belief of obtaining a business loan. He further submitted that there is no material to show that the petitioner induced the complainant or participated in the alleged cheating. The case is based on documentary evidence, which is already seized, and the main accused are still absconding. The petitioner voluntarily approached the police to lodge a complaint regarding the misuse of his account, which shows his bona fides. Therefore, he prayed the Court to grant bail to the petitioner by allowing this Criminal Petition.

5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposes the bail application, contending that the petitioner’s bank account was used as part of the fraudulent transactions, thereby linking him to the offence and that the investigation is in progress and involves tracing of financial transactions and identification of other accused persons. He contended that considering the nature of the offence involving online financial fraud and the role attributed to the petitioner, he is not entitled to bail at this stage. Therefore, he prayed the Court to dismiss the criminal petition.

6. In the light of the submissions made by both the learned counsel and on a perusal of the material available on record, it appears that the main allegation against the petitioner is that his bank account was used in the commission of the alleged cyber fraud, wherein the complainant was induced to transfer substantial amounts on the promise of high returns through an online trading platform. As seen from the record, the petitioner’s account forms part of the chain of transactions through which the defrauded amount was routed. The contention of the petitioner that his account was misused is a matter to be examined during the course of investigation. Further, the investigation is still in progres