Final Order 4

Order Details: COPY OF ORDER
Pdf Text: FIR No. 14/2025
	PS Cyber Police Station South West
	State Vs. Rakesh V.
1/5
Bail Matters 269/2026
STATE NCT OF DELHI Vs. RAKESH V.
FIR No. 14/2025
PS CYBER SOUTH WEST
U/s 308/318(4)/319/340 BNS
25.02.2026
This is an application under section 482 BNSS for grant of anticipatory
bail moved on behalf of accused/applicant Rakesh V.
Present: Sh. Gyan Prakash Ray, Ld. Addl. PP for the State.
Sh. Ajeet Yadav, Sh. Prabhash Kumar Singh and Sh. Satya
Naryana Yadav, ld. Counsels for accused/applicant.
IO SI Amit Malik is present.
Reply to the application filed. Copy supplied.
ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF ACCUSED/APPLICANT
1. It is argued on behalf of accused/applicant that
accused/applicant is apprehending his arrest as he has received notice
under section35(3) BNSS. It is further argued that no amount has been
received in the account of accused/applicant and he is falsely linked with
the offence as mentioned in the present FIR. It is further submitted that no
mobile phone, laptop, server or electronic device is required to be
recovered from the accused/applicant. However, accused/applicant is
ready to join the investigation as and when required by the IO. Hence, it
is prayed that anticipatory bail may be granted to accused/applicant as he
is ready to abide with any condition imposed by the court.
-- 1 of 5 --
FIR No. 14/2025
	PS Cyber Police Station South West
	State Vs. Rakesh V.
2/5
ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF STATE
2. On the other hand, 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 Sudhir Thakur vide
acknowledgment No. 30807250061771 dated 26.07.2025. Complainant
alleged that he was cheated on pretext of online investment fraud, causing
him a financial loss of approximately Rs. 12-13 lakhs. He further alleged
that he came in contact with a woman introducing herself as Leena Roy
(real name disclosed as Gunkirat Kaur) and claimed to be a London
based fashion designer through Facebook. She later communicated with
him on WhatsApp (+447955582326) and persuaded him to invest in
cryptocurrency trading. She introduced the complainant to a website
mdh37.com (Meridian Digital Hub) and initially small deposits were
made and withdrawn successfully. Subsequently, complainant was added
to a Whatsapp group named Cipherquant Strategies Vip08 and they
collectively induced the complainant to invest larger amounts between
02.07.2025 to 13.07.2025 and he deposited around Rs. 12-13 Lakhs in
total transactions.
2.1 During investigation beneficiary details of transactions were
obtained and amount Rs. 1,36,375/- was deposited in Account No.
20100036967791 Bandhan Bank M/s. GI Fencing & Harware Tarzan
Kalai, Amarpur, Taichan Para, Taichanpara, Gomati, Tripura and Rs.
10,68,741/- was deposited in Karnataka Bank Ltd. in account No.
0156252500014401 Rakesh V. s/o R Venketeshan r/o 3, Bajana Kovil
Street, 1st Main Road Sholinganallur, Kancheepuram, Tamil Nadu.
-- 2 of 5 --
FIR No. 14/2025
	PS Cyber Police Station South West
	State Vs. Rakesh V.
3/5
2.2 Cheated amount from bank account of accused/applicant
Karnataka Bank Ltd. account No. 0156252500014401 was further
transferred in four accounts i.e., Rs. 4,20,031/- in A/c No.
92302006502167 Axis Bank in the name of Amritsanshu Event P. Ltd.
(Director Sanjiv Kumar), Rs. 4,27,000/- in A/c No. 924020064877092
Axis Bank in the name of Shivshakar Trading Company and Milk Point
(Proprietor Sanjeev). Rs. 2,09,000/- in A/c No. 257296018955 Induslnd
Bank in the name of M/s Genista Jewels and Rs. 2,00,000/- in A/c No.
9074839067 Kotak Mahindra Bank in the name of A E Agencies.
2.3 On 25.10.2025 Sanjeev Kumar s/o Mahavir Prasad joined the
investigation. On 29.10.2025 on the directions of court, Sanjiv Kumar s/o
Sachidanand Singh joined the investigation and after sufficient evidence,
accused Sanjiv Kumar was arrested. After grating bail to accused Sanjiv,
he returned Rs. 2,00,000/- to the complainant.
2.4 Notice was under section 35(3) BNSS was served upon
accused/applicant on 20.11.2025 through Smanvya Portal and speed post,
however, he did not join the investigation. On 15.12.2025, notice under
section 35(3) BNSS was again served upon accused/applicant.
Accused/applicant was interrogated at his home itself and during
interrogation, he disclosed that he opened his bank account on direction
of his friend Vicky and gave him all his bank account kits and credentials
to Vicky for Rs. 1,000/-. It is further submitted that accused/applicant did
not cooperate in interrogation and notice was again served upon him to
join the investigation on 24.12.2025, however, he did not join the same.
2.5 It is further submitted that approximately Rs. 40 lakhs were
credited in the account of accused/applicant within a month of opening of
-- 3 of 5 --
FIR No. 14/2025
	PS Cyber Police Station South West
	State Vs. Rakesh V.
4/5
account. It is further submitted that custodial interrogation of
accused/applicant is required as he is direct beneficiary of fraudulent
amount of Rs. 10,68,741/-, to unearth whole syndicate and nexus of
offence and to identify and to trace out co-accused persons and for
recovery of cheated amount. Hence, it is prayed that present application
may be dismissed.
Submissions heard. Record perused.
FINDINGS/CONCLUSION
3. Allegations against accused/applicant are serious in nature.
Complainant was duped to the tune of Rs. 12-13 lakhs on the pretext of
online investment. Accused/applicant is direct beneficiary of the cheated
amount as out of the cheated amount, Rs. 10,68,741/- was deposited in his
bank account. Accused/applicant has joined the investigation only once
i.e., after service of second notice under section 35(3) BNSS. Thereafter,
another notice was served upon him to join the investigation on
24.12.2025, however, he failed to join the investigation. Total 05
complaints are found pending against the bank account of
accused/applicant.
3.1 In Soukin Vs. The NCT State New Delhi Bail Application
No. 177/2024, Hon’ble High Court of Delhi held that all the cyber
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.
-- 4 of 5 --
FIR No. 14/2025
	PS Cyber Police Station South West
	State Vs. Rakesh V.
5/5
3.2 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.
3.3 Granting bail is a discretion which is to be exercised by the
Court as per facts and circumstance of each case. 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.
3.4 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
anticipatory bail to accused/applicant Rakesh V. as custodial interrogation
of accused/applicant is required to unearth the modus operandi, to unearth
the whole syndicate and nexus of offence, to identify/trace out co-accused
persons and for recovery of cheated amount. Therefore, the application
moved on behalf of the accused/applicant Rakesh V. stands dismissed.
Nothing in this order shall tantamount to an expression of
opinion on the merits of the case during trial.
Copy of this order be given dasti as prayed for.
(Dhirendra Rana)
Bail Roster Judge/
ASJ-07/PHC/New Delhi
25.02.2026
-- 5 of 5 --