Final Order 14

Order Details: COPY OF ORDER
Pdf Text: Bail Matters 1016/2026
THE STATE AND ORS Vs. PAYAL KUMARI
FIR No. 118/2026
PS CYBER SOUTH WEST DELHI
U/sec 318(4)/319(2)/61(2)/3(5) BNS
CNR No. DLND01-004944-2026
31.07.2026
This is an application under section 482 BNSS for grant of
anticipatory bail moved on behalf of accused/applicant Payal
Kumari.
Present: Sh. A. B. Asthana, Ld. Addl. PP for the State.
Sh. Kishlay Kumar, Ld. Counsel for accused/applicant
through VC.
It is submitted by Ld. Counsel that he has received
instructions from accused/applicant to contest the application on
merits as she does not want to withdraw the same.
Arguments on application have already been heard and
today matter is fixed for orders.
ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF ACCUSED/APPLICANT
1. It was argued on behalf of accused/applicant that she is
apprehending her arrest in present case. It was further submitted that
on 25.03.2026 applicant was interrogated at her residence with
respect to involvement of her husband Raj Bhagat and she informed
that she had not information about her banking account as the same
are managed by her husband. It was further submitted that applicant
FIR No. 118/2026
	PS Cyber South West Delhi State Vs. Payal Kumari
1/6
-- 1 of 6 --
is a pregnant lady and she is ready to join the investigation as and
when required by the IO. It was further submitted that
accused/applicant has never been involved in any criminal case
previously. Hence, it is prayed that anticipatory bail may be granted
to him as he is ready to abide with any condition imposed by the
court.
1.1 Ld. Counsel has relied upon Bhadresh Vipin Bhai Sets
Vs. State of Gujarat & Ans. 2016 (1) SCC 152, Arnesh Kumar Vs.
State of Bihar to fortify his arguments.
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
complainant Smt. Mansi Agnihotri wherein she alleged that she had
been contacted via Telegram application for attractive investment
plan with assured returns. She further alleged that initially, the
scammers gained her trust by providing convincing details and
small returns, however, later on they informed her that due to a data
error issue, the invested funds had been frozen and could only be
released upon making additional payments. Under the false pretext,
she transferred total amount of Rs. 6,08,024/- to the accounts/details
provided by the criminal. Despite the repeated assurances, she
neither received the invested amount nor any returns and fraudsters
continued to demand further payments.
FIR No. 118/2026
	PS Cyber South West Delhi State Vs. Payal Kumari
2/6
-- 2 of 6 --
2.1 During investigation, money trail was conducted and it
came on record that total amount of Rs. 4,63,000/- transferred in
account No. 110244132000 Canara Bank registered in the name of
Akash Kumar Kalindi. Upon service of notice under section 35(3)
BNSS, accused Akash Kumar Kalindi joined the investigation with
mobile phones at PS Sitaram Dera Jamshedpur Jharkhand. As per
record, accused Akash Kumar Kalindi opened around 10 bank
accounts in order to siphoned the cheated amount. His mobile phone
also found containing incriminating data with respect to operation
of various bank accounts with his accomplice Raj Bhagat and Ajay
Bhagat. After sufficient evidence, accused Akash Kumar was
arrested in this case.
2.2 During investigation, raid was conducted at the house
of accused Raj Bhagat but he did not open the door and deleted the
WhatsApp chat record and telegram channel data. Notice under
section 35(3) BNSS was served upon Raj Bhagat to join the
investigation. During further investigation, the money trail
established as the cheated amount of Rs. 1,91,000/- got received by
the alleged Raj Bhagat in his wife’s i.e., applicant Payal Kumari
Induslnd Bank account No. 152012102004 from account of accused
Akash Kumar Kalindi as second layer account. The said account
was found reported four times from different States i.e., Delhi,
Tamil Nadu and U. P. on NCRP Portal. Accused Raj Bhagat was
examined and after sufficient evidence, accused Raj Bhagat was
arrested in this case.
FIR No. 118/2026
	PS Cyber South West Delhi State Vs. Payal Kumari
3/6
-- 3 of 6 --
2.3 It was further submitted that total 43 NCRP
complainants from various States found linked with the bank
account managed by the accused Raj Bhagat. During further
investigation notice under section 35(3) BNSS was served upon
accused/applicant Payal Kumari but she did not join the
investigation. It was further submitted that custodial interrogation of
accused/applicant is required to unearth the whole cyber syndicate
and to confront with the co-accused persons as she beneficiary of
the cheated amount. Hence, it is prayed that preset application may
be dismissed in the interest of justice.
3. Submissions heard. Record perused. I have also gone
through the case laws relied upon by accused/applicant.
FINDINGS/CONCLUSION
4. Allegations against accused/applicant are serious in
nature. During the cyber fraud, complainant was cheated to the tune
of Rs. 6,08,024/- out of which 4,63,000/- was transferred in the
account of co-accused Akash Kumar Kalindi. Accused Akash
Kumar further transferred Rs. 1,91,000/- in the account of
accused/applicant Payal Kumari i.e., wife of accused Raj Bhagat).
4.1 During investigation, name of co-accused Ajay Bhagat
came into picture on the basis of technical evidence, whatsapp chat
record (regarding mule account management) and disclosure
statements of accused persons as he was coordinating with the co-
accused persons during the said fraud and he happens to be relative
FIR No. 118/2026
	PS Cyber South West Delhi State Vs. Payal Kumari
4/6
-- 4 of 6 --
of accused Raj Bhagat and applicant Payal Kumari. During the
investigation conducted so far, it is clear the whole family is
involved in the cyber fraud.
4.2 In Soukin Vs. The NCT State New Delhi Bail
Application No. 177/2024, Hon’ble High Court of Delhi held that
all the cyber 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.
4.3 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.
4.4 Granting bail is a discretion which is to be exercised by
the Court as per facts and circumstances 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.
4.5 In view of the above facts and circumstances of the
case and the fact the despite service of notice under section 35(3)
BNSS, accused has not joined the investigation, I am of the
considered view that no ground is made out for grant of anticipatory
bail to accused/applicant Payal Kumari as custodial interrogation of
FIR No. 118/2026
	PS Cyber South West Delhi State Vs. Payal Kumari
5/6
-- 5 of 6 --
accused/applicant is required to unearth the whole cyber syndicate
and to confront with disclosure statement of co-accused persons as
she is beneficiary of the cheated amount as Rs. 1,91,000/- was
transferred to her account as second layer account. Therefore, the
application moved on behalf of accused/applicant Payal Kumari
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)
ASJ-07/PHC/New Delhi
31.07.2026
FIR No. 118/2026
	PS Cyber South West Delhi State Vs. Payal Kumari
6/6
-- 6 of 6 --