Final Order 1

Order Details: COPY OF ORDER
Pdf Text: Bail Matter No. 2036/2026
STATE NCT OF DELHI Vs. JAY GUPTA
FIR No. 92/2026 (PS- CYBER NEW DELHI)
16.09.2026
Present: Sh. Ajay Kumar Aggarwal, Ld. Spl. PP for the
State.
Sh. Niraj Kumar Jha, Ld. counsel for
accused/applicant.
Sh. Praveen Kumar, Ld. counsel for the
complainant.
IO HC Kapil Dev in person.
Reply to the anticipatory bail application of accused
filed. Same is taken on record.
It is stated that the complainant has settled the matter
with the accused/applicant and he has already received the cheated
amount and therefore, he has no objection if the accused is granted
bail.
Arguments on the present bail application heard.
Put up for orders at 02:30 PM.
(Prabh Deep Kaur)
Roster Judge/ASJ (POCSO)-06,
NDD/PHC/New Delhi
16.09.2026
At 02:30 PM.
Bail Order
1. This is an application on behalf of applicant/accused
namely Jay Gupta u/s 482 BNSS seeking grant of anticipatory bail.
1/5
-- 1 of 5 --
2. Ld. Counsel for applicant submitted that the present
FIR has been registered on the basis of the complaint by the
complainant due to miscommunication between the applicant and
the complainant. It is further submitted that matter is amicably
settled between the complainant and applicant and he has made the
payment of the cheated amount of Rs. 1,43,000/- to the complainant
and receipts regarding the said payment is also placed on record. It
is further submitted that the complainant does not wishes to pursue
the present FIR and has no objection if the applicant is granted bail.
It is argued that there is no likelihood of fleeing of the applicant
from justice or evading the investigation. He undertakes to appear
before the Investigating Officer whenever required upon reasonable
notice, furnish all documents lawfully sought, answer relevant
queries truthfully and abide by any condition imposed by this
Hon'ble Court. That custodial interrogation is wholly unnecessary in
the facts of the present case. The applicant's custodial detention
would serve no useful investigative purpose. In view of the
applicant's continuous cooperation, absence of criminal antecedents,
permanent residence and deep roots in society, absence of any
allegation of absconding or tampering with evidence and the
absence of any demonstrated necessity for custodial interrogation,
the applicant deserves the protection of anticipatory bail.
3. Reply filed by the IO. Ld. PP for the State has opposed
the bail application on the basis that the present case involves a
2/5
-- 2 of 5 --
serious economic offence, however the reply of IO mentions that the
NCRP Complaint/Acknowledgement No. 32705260042483,
registered against the applicant’s Bandhan Bank Account No.
20100073058005 and Kotak Mahindra Bank Account No.
5750561689, stands withdrawn by the complainant; the parties have
mutually settled the matter and the complaint stands closed. On
10.09.2026, the applicant/accused Jay Gupta joined the investigation
and disclosed that he is the proprietor of TS Trident Company,
engaged in providing software-based, AI-based and algorithmic
software services. He produced the company’s relevant documents
and licences, and explained the nature, functioning, and operation of
such services. He stated that the complainant had subscribed to the
company’s algorithmic software services and transferred Rs.
1,43,000 towards the subscription. The amount was received against
services availed; neither he nor his company committed any cyber
fraud. The documents furnished were taken on record. From the
interrogation report, it appears that the applicant runs a genuine
company providing software services in the ordinary course of
business. The complainant availed the annual trading subscription
for some time, later discontinued it and subsequently lodged the
present cyber fraud complaint regarding the subscription amount.
4. Arguments have been heard. Record has been perused.
5. Gist of the allegations are that the present case was
registered on the allegation that the complainant had suffered a total
3/5
-- 3 of 5 --
loss of Rs.1,45,000/- by applicant on the pretext of good returns
against his investment in share market. Admittedly, applicant joined
the investigation and explained the nature of his business and the
fact that the complainant has subscribed to the said investment. It is
further on record that the complainant had subscribed & availed the
services of the applicant’s company and that the applicant is running
a genuine business. From the reply of the IO, it emerges that
applicant has joined the investigation and the investigation is being
carried out and there is no likelihood of the arrest of applicant in
future.
6. Anticipatory bail is a pre-arrest legal remedy intended
to safeguard personal liberty where an individual has reasonable
grounds to believe that they may be arrested for a non-bailable
offence. Its object is to prevent unnecessary incarceration and
protect against false implication or harassment. In the instant matter,
the Investigating Officer has submitted that the dispute between the
parties has been compounded and the complainant has already
received the contested amount via online transactions. This indicates
that the financial grievance, if any, stands addressed. Moreover, on a
prima facie examination of the record, it transpires that the payment
made by the complainant was towards services offered by the
applicant’s company. Consequently, the complainant does not
appear to be a victim of cyber fraud, and the essential ingredients of
the alleged offence are not prima facie satisfied.
4/5
-- 4 of 5 --
7. In view of above mentioned facts and circumstances,
the anticipatory bail is granted to the applicant and in the event of his
arrest, the IO is directed to release the applicant Jay Gupta, S/o.
Mukesh Gupta on bail subject to furnishing of personal bond and
surety bond in the sum of Rs.20,000/- and the anticipatory bail is
granted subject to following conditions:-
1. he will join the investigation and cooperate with IO
concerned/Department concerned.
2. he will provide his mobile number to the IO
concerned/concerned department.
3. he will not leave the country without permission of the Court.
4. he will not commit any offence whatsoever during the period
when he is on anticipatory bail in the instant case.
5. he will not threaten or induced any witness and shall not
tamper with the evidence in any manner.
6. he will convey any change of address immediately to the IO
concerned/concerned department.
Anticipatory bail application of applicant Jay Gupta
stands disposed off accordingly.
Copy of this order be given
dasti as prayed for.
(Prabh Deep Kaur)
Roster Judge/ASJ (POCSO)-06,
NDD/PHC/New Delhi
16.09.2026
5/5
-- 5 of 5 --