Final Order 3

Order Details: COPY OF ORDER
Pdf Text: FIR No. 71/2025
	PS Cyber Police Station South West State Vs. Kachariya Preet Vinod Bhai
1/6
Bail Matters 213/2026
STATE OF DELHI Vs. KHACHARIYA PREET VINODBHAI
FIR No. 71/2025
PS CYBER NEW DELHI
U/sec 318(4)/319(2)/61(2) BNS
23.02.2026
This is IIIrd application under section 483 BNSS for grant of regular bail
moved on behalf of accused/applicant Kachariya Preet Vinodbhai.
Present: Sh. Gyan Prakash Ray, Ld. Addl. PP for the State.
Sh. Harisht Prakash, ld. Counsel for accused/applicant
through VC.
Sh. N. D. B. Raju/complainant is present through VC.
ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF ACCUSED/APPLICANT
1. It is argued on behalf of accused/applicant that he has been
falsely implicated in this case and he is in JC since 04.11.2025. It is
further submitted that accused/applicant has been arrested in violation of
due process established by law, without following the mandate of section
35 of BNSS It is further argued that investigation against
accused/applicant has already been completed and charge sheet has
already been filed and no useful purpose will be served in keeping
accused/applicant in custody. It is further submitted that co-accused
persons Abhay Singh Rathor and Kaniram Gurjar @ Kanhaiya, whose
role is similar to present accused, have already been released on bail.
Hence, it is prayed that accused/applicant be released on bail on the
ground of parity as he is ready to abide with any condition imposed by the
court.
-- 1 of 6 --
FIR No. 71/2025
	PS Cyber Police Station South West State Vs. Kachariya Preet Vinod Bhai
2/6
1.1 Ld. Counsel has relied upon Ritu Chhabaraia Vs. Union of
India (2024) 12 SCC 116, Satender Kumar Antil Vs. CBI (2022) 10 SCC
51, Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar (2014) 8 SCC 273, Amandeep Singh
Johar Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) 2018 SCC OnLine Del 13448 and Vikas
Chawla Vs. State NCT of Delhi 2025 SCC OnLine Del 1936 to fortify his
arguments.
ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF STATE
2. Per contra, Ld. Addl. PP for the State has vehemently
opposed the bail application stating that as per reply filed by IO, present
case was registered on the complaint of complainant N. D. B. Raju
wherein he alleged that he had been duped for a sum of Rs. 9.36 lacs on
the pretext of investment. During fraud, the money thus duped was
transferred into three different accounts. One account of Kotak Mahindra
Bank i.e., account No. 8460511482 in the name of GLXKRT Ventures P.
Ltd. under the KYC of one Sandip Vaghela r/o Surat, Gujarat was found
in which Rs. 6.86 Lacs were transferred in two transactions.
2.1 During investigation, notice u/sec 94 BNSS were served to
Kotak Mahindra Bank and Google LERS and their responses were
obtained. The IP logs obtained of the contemporary period from Google
LERS for alleged Gmail ID i.e., glxlkart@gmail.com which was
registered in the alleged Kotak Mahindra Bank account were resolved and
same was found to be of mobile No. 7777900304, registered in the name
of accused/applicant Kachariya Preet Vinodbhai.
2.2 CDR of said mobile number was obtained and after
analyzing, it was revealed that on 13.07.2025, both the numbers were
-- 2 of 6 --
FIR No. 71/2025
	PS Cyber Police Station South West State Vs. Kachariya Preet Vinod Bhai
3/6
present in the same area in Jetpur, Rajkot. On 14.07.2025, both the
numbers were again present in the same area in Ahmedabad, Gujarat,
which was later brought to Uaidpur by accused/applicant where the fraud
transactions were done in the alleged account.
2.3 After technical surveillance and local intelligence,
accused/applicant was traced in the area of PS Sukher, Udaipur, Rajasthan
and notice under section 35(3) BNSS was served upon him.
Accused/applicant has joined the investigation but he did not cooperate in
the investigation. During further investigation, accused/applicant was
arrested. Mobile device was also recovered from him, during analysis it
was found that co-accused shared the credentials of alleged Kotak
Mahindra Bank with accused/applicant.
2.4 It is further submitted that during investigation, notice was
served upon account holder of Kotak Mahindra Bank namely Sandip
Vaghela, who joined the investigation. Notice was again served upon
Sandip Vaghela, however, he did not join the investigation later on.
During further investigation, co-accused Vadodariya Rahul Pravinbhai
was arrested on 29.12.2025. Notices were also served upon co-accused
Saiyad Sajid Imtiyaz Bhai and Vekariya Muljibhai and they are yet to join
the investigation. It is further submitted that investigation is at initial
stage, cheated amount as well as case property are yet to be recovered and
co-accused persons are yet to be traced. Hence, it is prayed that present
application may be dismissed accordingly.
-- 3 of 6 --
FIR No. 71/2025
	PS Cyber Police Station South West State Vs. Kachariya Preet Vinod Bhai
4/6
Submissions heard. Record perused. I have also gone
through the judgments/orders relied upon by ld. Counsel for
accused/applicant.
FINDINGS/CONCLUSION
3. Allegations against accused/applicant are serious in nature.
He acted as an important member of the Cyber syndicate. The
complainant was duped to Rs. 9.36 Lacs on the pretext of investment
opportunities. IP logs of Kotak Mahindra Bank and Google LERS were
obtained alongwith implicated account i.e., 8460511482 was already
registered with the mobile of the accused. IP address of the accused’s
mobile number is corroborating his involvement. Chats and data
recovered from the mobile of the accused are suggestive of the fact that
accused is deeply involved in the crime of Cyber fraud. Within the time
span of three days, Rs. 1.5 crores were received in the above mentioned
account and there are 26 complaints pending against this account at
NCRP portal.
3.1 The ground of parity is not available to accused/applicant as
there was no data recovered from mobile phone of co-accused persons,
and the documentary and electronic evidence available against
accused/applicant. No such evidence could be recovered from co-accused
persons, therefore, role of present accused/applicant is much graver then
co-accused persons, who have been admitted to bail and ground of parity
is not available to accused/applicant.
3.2 In Soukin Vs. The NCT State New Delhi Bail Application
No. 177/2024, Hon’ble High Court of Delhi held that all the Cyber
-- 4 of 6 --
FIR No. 71/2025
	PS Cyber Police Station South West State Vs. Kachariya Preet Vinod Bhai
5/6
offences are grave and serious in nature. They not only undermine the
individual dignity but also pose a serious challenge to the law
enforcement due to its clandestine and cross-jurisdictional nature.
3.3 Considering the fact that Cyber frauds are increasing day by
day and it is a tedious task to complete the investigation as it not only
requires technical expertise but requires commutation time as several
frauds are being done from various places throughout in India. The
manner in which offence has been committed, it is apparent that accused
is a part of group of persons committing Cyber frauds.
3.4 The judgment relied upon Ld. Counsel for the
accused/applicant is not applicable to the present case being
distinguishable on facts and moreover, granting bail is a discretion which
is to be exercised by the Court as per facts and circumstance of each case.
3.5 In Mansab Ali Vs. Irsan and Anr. 2003 SC 707, it has been
held by Hon’ble Supreme Court that since the jurisdiction is
discretionary, it is required to be exercised with great care and caution by
balancing valuable right of liberty of an individual and the interest of the
society in general.
3.6 Allegations against accused/applicant are serious in nature. It
is also worth mentioning that accused/applicant has already withdrawn
his bail application before Hon’ble High Court which was disposed off on
27.01.2026. There is every likelihood that accused/applicant may commit
further offence of similar nature, if released on bail. Co-accused persons
i.e., Saiyad Sajid Imtiyaz Bhai, Vekariya Muljibhai and Sandip Vaghela
are yet to be arrested in this case.
-- 5 of 6 --
FIR No. 71/2025
	PS Cyber Police Station South West State Vs. Kachariya Preet Vinod Bhai
6/6
3.7 In view of the above facts and circumstances of the case, I
am of the considered view that no ground is made out for grant of bail to
accused/applicant Kachariya Preet Vinodbhai. Therefore, the application
moved on behalf of the accused/applicant Kachariya Preet Vinodbhai
stands dismissed.
Nothing stated above herein shall tantamount of any
expressions on the merits of this case.
Pursuant to directions issued by Hon’ble Supreme Court of
India in SMWP (Criminal) No. 4/2021 titled as In Re Policy Strategy for
Grant of Bail as well as in compliance of judgment titled as Ajay Verma
Vs. State, copy of this order be sent to Jail Superintendent through e-mail.
Copy of this order be given dasti as prayed for.
(Dhirendra Rana)
Bail Roster Judge
ASJ-07/PHC/New Delhi
23.02.2026
-- 6 of 6 --