Final Order 1

Order Details: COPY OF ORDER
Pdf Text: 1
Bail Application No. 2217/2025 ; FIR No. 71/2025
State Vs. Khachariya Preet Vinod Bhai
Bail Application No. 2217/2025
State Vs. Khachariya Preet Vinod Bhai
FIR No. 71/2025
U/s 318(4)/319(2)/61(2) BNS
PS Cyber South-West, New Delhi
20.12.2025
Present: Sh. Ajay Aggarwal, Ld. Addl. PP for State.
Ms. Puja Jakhar and Sh. Harshit Prakash, Ld. Counsels for
applicant/accused.
Complainant Sh. NDB Raju is present.
SI Opendar Singh is present.
1. The present application has been filed by the accused/applicant,
Khachariya Preet Vinod Bhai, seeking bail under Section 483 of the
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) (inadvertently
mentioned in the application as Section 480 BNSS). The accused is
currently in judicial custody in connection with the aforementioned FIR,
registered on the complaint of Mr. NDB Raju, resident of Vasant Kunj,
New Delhi. The complainant alleges that he was defrauded of Rs. 9.36
lakhs under the pretext of investment opportunities, with the defrauded
amount being transferred into multiple bank accounts, including Kotak
Mahindra Bank Account No. 8460511482 in the name of GLXKART
Ventures Private Limited, under the KYC of one Sandeep, wherein Rs.
6.86 lakhs were credited.
2. Reply to the bail application already filed by the IO. Arguments heard.
Record perused.
3. Brief facts, as emerging from the record, indicate that during the
investigation, notices under Section 94 BNSS were served upon Kotak
-- 1 of 5 --
2
Bail Application No. 2217/2025 ; FIR No. 71/2025
State Vs. Khachariya Preet Vinod Bhai
Mahindra Bank and Google, yielding responses that included IP logs from
the relevant period. These IP logs were resolved and traced to mobile
number 7777900304, registered in the name of the accused/applicant. Call
Detail Records (CDR) analysis further revealed that this mobile number
was co-located with the registered mobile number of the aforementioned
bank account in Jetpur, Rajkot on 13.07.2025, and in Ahmedabad, Gujarat
on 14.07.2025. Subsequently, the accused was located in the jurisdiction
of PS Sukher, Udaipur, Rajasthan, where fraudulent transactions were
executed.
4. A notice under Section 35(3) BNSS was served upon the accused to join
the investigation, but he failed to cooperate and provided misleading
information. He was arrested on 04.11.2025, with intimation given to his
family and the local police station. Grounds of arrest were served, and all
guidelines laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court were adhered to. A
medical examination was conducted, followed by a two-day transit remand
from the court in Udaipur. Upon being produced before this court, one day
of police custody remand was granted, during which his mobile device was
seized and analyzed.
5. The Ld. Additional Public Prosecutor for the State, assisted by the IO, has
strongly opposed the bail application, submitting that the investigation is
at an initial stage. It is contended that the IP logs unequivocally
demonstrate that the implicated bank account was operated from the
mobile device of the accused/applicant. Furthermore, upon apprehension,
chats and data recovered from the accused's mobile phone reveal his deep
involvement in cyber fraud activities, including the exchange of details and
credentials of several bank accounts with associates, for which he received
-- 2 of 5 --
3
Bail Application No. 2217/2025 ; FIR No. 71/2025
State Vs. Khachariya Preet Vinod Bhai
commissions. The State further submits that approximately INR 1.5 crores
were transferred into the said account over a period of three days, and this
account is linked to a total of 26 complaints on the National Cyber Crime
Reporting Portal (NCRP). The co-accused remain at large, the defrauded
amount is yet to be recovered, and the mobile device requires thorough
forensic analysis to dismantle the broader cyber-crime syndicate. The
accused, not being a permanent resident of Delhi, poses a risk of
absconding, thereby hindering the investigation.
6. Per contra, the Ld. Counsel for the accused/applicant has argued that the
accused has been falsely implicated and is in judicial custody since
04.11.2025 without sufficient grounds. It is submitted that no prior notice
under Section 35 BNSS was properly served, and the family was not
informed of the arrest details, including the FIR number and police station,
until 07.11.2025. The ld. Counsel contends that the accused has clean
antecedents and is willing to abide by any bail conditions. Specifically
addressing the IP logs, it is argued that the linkage may arise merely
because a hotspot from the accused's phone was used by others to access
the account, without the accused's direct involvement. The ld. Counsel
further submits that the arrest was made in violation of procedural
safeguards, rendering continued detention unnecessary and harassing.
7. At the outset, this court notes that the allegations pertain to a serious cyber
fraud, involving the systematic duping of victims through orchestrated
investment schemes. The principles governing bail under Section 483
BNSS require a balanced consideration of the gravity of the offence, the
stage of investigation, the risk of tampering with evidence, and the
likelihood of the accused absconding or reoffending.
-- 3 of 5 --
4
Bail Application No. 2217/2025 ; FIR No. 71/2025
State Vs. Khachariya Preet Vinod Bhai
8. Having examined the material on record, this court finds that the IP logs
obtained from Kotak Mahindra Bank and Google clearly establish that the
implicated account (No. 8460511482) was operated from the mobile
device associated with the accused/applicant. This is not a mere
coincidence but a direct evidentiary link, corroborated by the resolution of
IP addresses to the accused's registered mobile number (7777900304)
during the contemporaneous period of the fraudulent transactions.
9. Furthermore, upon the accused's apprehension, the chats and data
recovered from his mobile phone provide compelling evidence of his deep
involvement in cyber fraud. These recoveries demonstrate that the accused
exchanged details and credentials of multiple bank accounts with his
associates, indicating an active role in supplying such accounts for illicit
purposes and receiving commissions therefor. This material not only
substantiates the State's case but also reveals a pattern of organized
criminal activity.
10.The argument advanced by the Ld. Defence Counsel—that the IP logs may
result from the use of a hotspot from the accused's phone by third parties
—is not tenable. Such a contention lacks credibility in light of the
recovered chats, which explicitly show the accused's direct participation in
sharing bank credentials and coordinating fraudulent operations. The
hotspot theory appears to be an afterthought, unsupported by any
corroborative evidence, and is insufficient to dispel the prima facie
involvement established by the digital forensics.
11. Moreover, the scale of the offence aggravates the matter. The account in
question, accessed via the accused's phone as per the IP logs, received
approximately INR 1.5 crores in a short span, and is linked to 26 NCRP
-- 4 of 5 --
5
Bail Application No. 2217/2025 ; FIR No. 71/2025
State Vs. Khachariya Preet Vinod Bhai
complaints, suggesting a widespread impact on multiple victims. Granting
bail at this juncture could jeopardize the recovery of the defrauded
amounts, the arrest of co-accused, and the comprehensive analysis of the
seized device, which is essential to uncovering the full extent of the cyber-
crime syndicate.
12.In view of the foregoing, considering the gravity of the offence, the prima
facie evidence of the accused's involvement, the initial stage of
investigation, and the risks associated with granting liberty, this court is of
the considered opinion that bail is not warranted. The application is
accordingly dismissed.
13. Copy of this order be given dasti to Ld. Counsel for applicants/accused
person and in compliance of Sanjay Singh Vs. State (Govt. of NCT of
Delhi), Writ Petition Criminal no. 974/22, copy of this order be also sent
to the concerned Jail Superintendent to convey the order to the inmate.
14. The application is disposed off accordingly.
(Saurabh Partap Singh Laler)
ASJ-05, New Delhi District
Patiala House Courts, New Delhi
20.12.2025
-- 5 of 5 --