Raju Kumar Manjhi vs Central Bureau Of Investigation

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

Reserved on: July 03, 2026
% Pronounced on: July 06, 2026

+ BAIL APPLN. 2227/2026

RAJU KUMAR MANJHI .....Applicant
Through: Mr. Sanjay Jain, Sr. Adv. with Mr.
Nalin Tripathi, Mr. Nishank
Tripathi, Mr. Nischal Tripathi and
Ms. Harshita Sukhija, Advs.
Versus

CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION .....Respondent
Through: Mr. Vikrant Pachnanda, SPP for
CBI with Mr. Mukul Katyal, Adv.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAURABH BANERJEE


J U D G M E N T

1. By virtue of the present application under Section 483 of the
1
Raju Kumar
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 , the applicant
Manjhi
seeks grant of regular bail in connection with FIR
No.RC2212024E0022 dated 07.12.2024 registered by the Central Bureau
2
of Investigation at PS: EO-III, Delhi under Sections
3
120B/170/419/420/343/346/388 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and
4
Section 66D of the Information Technology Act, 2000 .
2. Succinctly put , as per prosecution, the aforesaid FIR was registered

1
Hereinafter referred to as “ BNSS ”
2
Hereinafter referred to as “ CBI ”
3
Hereinafter referred to as “ IPC ”
4
Hereinafter referred to as “ IT Act ”
Signature Not Verified
BAIL APPLN. 2227/2026 Page 1 of 7

Digitally Signed
By:BABLOO SHAH
Signing Date:06.07.2026
17:15:13

against unknown person(s), wherein it was alleged that an elaborate cyber-
fraud network was operating from India and abroad, targeting Indian
citizens by impersonating as law enforcement and courier agencies
personnel. The syndicate employed the modus operandi of intimidation and
digital surveillance/ digital arrest to extort monies from the victims. In fact,
the FIR specifically contained ten incidents during the period from January
to October 2024 involving ten different victims including Mr. Anshu Mittal,
who was alleged to be contacted by persons impersonating as FedEx and
Mumbai Cyber Crime official and was kept under digital confinement from
29.12.2023 to 01.01.2024. During the said period, said Mr. Anshu Mittal
was threatened with serious criminal charges punishable with life
imprisonment and was coerced into making two high-value transactions
aggregating to Rs.48,56,275/- into two separate bank accounts of M/s.
Balaji Enterprises (Rs.15,93,000/-) and M/s. Sabir Enterprises
(Rs.32,63,275/-).
3. Subsequently upon completion of investigation, a charge-sheet has
been filed qua the allegations relating to the victim Mr. Anshu Mittal
arraigning, inter alia , the present applicant as an accused and specifically
setting out his role as under:
“16.23 Investigation revealed that Raju Kumar Manjhi is
a key member of an organized cyber-fraud and money-
laundering syndicate.

16.24 During investigation IP logs for the PNB A/c No.
1718202100001102 of M/s. Sabir Enterprise were analyzed
and IPDRs obtained from the concerned TSPs. The account's
internet banking was accessed via Airtel networks on
29.12.2023 and 30.12.2023, and subsequently, from
30.12.2023 to 01.01.2024, consistently through proxy servers
Signature Not Verified
BAIL APPLN. 2227/2026 Page 2 of 7

Digitally Signed
By:BABLOO SHAH
Signing Date:06.07.2026
17:15:13

including Alibaba US Technology Co., DIGITALOCEAN-
ASN, and HostRoyale Technologies Pvt. Ltd., including on the
dates of the fraudulent transactions. In two 1nstances, the IPs
were traced to Indian numbers, notably 9717161185. which
accessed the account from Etawah-Kanpur Highway, Agra-
Lucknow Expressway, and Gurugram on 29-30.12.2023.

16.25 Investigation has revealed that mobile number
9717161185, used to access the internet banking facility of M/s
Sabir Enterprise two days before the fraud, is registered in the
name of Raju Kumar Manjhi with his presence in Gurgaon and
Kolkata corroborated through CDRs, Blinkit logs etc. Mobile
number 9717161185 is linked to a Blinkit account in the name
of Raju, with the delivery address recorded as 18/43, 2nd
Floor, Room No. 12, U Block, DLF Phase 3, Sector 24,
Gurugram, Haryana, for the period from 11 .11 .2023 to
27.04.2024 which include fraud period. The house owner has
also been examined who confirmed that Raju Kumar Manjhi
used to live at this address during the relevant period.”
4. In fact, the very same charge-sheet, interestingly also records that
further investigation is to continue only in respect of other suspected
persons and other victims, in the following terms:
“16.55 That further investigation regarding other
suspected persons and in respect of the remaining eight
victims shall continue under Section 193(9) BNSS. A
supplementary final report shall be filed upon completion of
such further investigation. It is, therefore, prayed that this
Hon’ble Court may kindly permit continuation of
investigation in the interest of justice.”
[Emphasis Supplied]
5
5. Cognizance thereon was taken by the learned ACJM-08 vide order
dated 17.02.2026 and summons were issued to the applicant. Pursuant

5
Hereinafter referred to as “ Magistrate ”
Signature Not Verified
BAIL APPLN. 2227/2026 Page 3 of 7

Digitally Signed
By:BABLOO SHAH
Signing Date:06.07.2026
17:15:13

thereto, the application seeking bail of the applicant was dismissed vide
order dated 29.05.2026 by the learned Magistrate. This has resulted in the
applicant being sent to Judicial Custody.
6. Thereafter, the applicant moved another bail application before the
learned Sessions Court which also came to be dismissed vide order dated
06.06.2026.
7. In these facts, this Court has heard learned senior counsel for the
applicant and the learned Special Public Prosecutor for CBI.
8. Admittedly , as evident from the records before this Court, the
investigating agency itself never considered it necessary to arrest the
applicant during the entire course of investigation and the applicant was
only taken into custody post rejection of his bail application, and that too
only after filing of the charge-sheet and cognizance being taken thereon. As
such, the applicant was never arrested prior to the filing of the charge-sheet.
In view thereof, mere not joining investigation in compliance of two notices
by the applicant is not such a relevant factor. It was open for the
investigating agency to have taken recourse to the coercive measures
available in law for securing presence of the applicant if it was so
significant, more so, whence the applicant herein is not named in the FIR
and limited/ no-direct role (as reproduced in para no.3 above) has been
ascribed to him in the charge-sheet.
9. In fact, recently the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Musheer Alam vs.
6
The State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr. has held as under:
“8. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would
submit that there is a practice in the State of Uttar Pradesh

6
SLP(Crl.) No.18081/2024
Signature Not Verified
BAIL APPLN. 2227/2026 Page 4 of 7

Digitally Signed
By:BABLOO SHAH
Signing Date:06.07.2026
17:15:13

that arrest is effected after the charge-sheet is filed and the
court takes cognizance of the charge-sheet. We do not propose
to say anything as regards in this unusual practice except that
it makes no sense.
9. We are of the view that once the investigation is over
and charge-sheet is filed then the accused should be asked to
appear before the Court concerned and should furnish bail to
the satisfaction of the trial court.
10. If at all, the Investigating Officer wanted to interrogate
the petitioner, he could have arrested him during the course of
the investigation itself. Now there is no point in making a
formal arrest.”
10. In the wake of the above, though CBI has sought to contend that
further investigation qua the present applicant is ongoing and there may be
a requirement of custodial interrogation of the applicant, considering the
nature of the charge-sheet filed, the same cannot be a sole ground for denial
of regular bail to the applicant herein.
11. In such circumstances, for the purposes of the present application
wherein the applicant is seeking grant of regular bail, the contents of the
charge-sheet already filed are of significant relevance, more so, since
cognizance has also been taken thereon. That the applicant himself appeared
before the learned Magistrate pursuant to issuance of summons is also a
vital factor for consideration for grant bail. Moreover, as borne out from the
records, the whole case of the prosecution substantially hinges/ rests on
documentary and electronic evidence(s), all of which are already seized and
is/ are in the custody of the investigating agency, and there hardly being any
scope for the applicant to tamper with it/ them. Further, it is informed that
other co-accused persons who have been attributed comparatively more
Signature Not Verified
BAIL APPLN. 2227/2026 Page 5 of 7

Digitally Signed
By:BABLOO SHAH
Signing Date:06.07.2026
17:15:13

significant role have already been granted bail.
12. Accordingly, for the reasons above, and since it is a settled position
of law that the purpose/ object of bail is to secure the presence of the
applicant during trial, the present application is allowed.
13. Resultantly, the applicant be released on regular bail in proceedings
arising out of FIR No.RC2212024E0022 dated 07.12.2024 registered at PS:
EO-III, Delhi under Sections 120B/170/419/420/343/346/388 IPC and
Section 66D of the IT Act, subject to him furnishing a personal bond in the
sum of Rs.50,000/- [ Rupees Fifty Thousand Only ] along with one surety of
the like amount by a family member/ friend having no criminal case pending
against him/ her and further subject to the satisfaction of the Jail
Superintendent, and further subject to the following conditions:
i. Applicant shall not leave NCT of Delhi without prior
permission of this Court and shall ordinarily reside at the address as
per prison records. If he wishes to change his residential address, he
shall immediately intimate about the same to the IO by way of an
affidavit.
ii. Applicant shall surrender his Passport, if any, to the IO, within
a period of three days .
iii. Applicant shall appear before the Court as and when the matter
is taken up for hearing.
iv. Applicant shall provide all his mobile numbers to the IO
concerned which shall be kept in working condition at all times and
shall not be switch off or change the mobile number without prior
intimation to the IO concerned.
v. Applicant shall report to the IO at PS: EO-III, Delhi once every
Signature Not Verified
BAIL APPLN. 2227/2026 Page 6 of 7

Digitally Signed
By:BABLOO SHAH
Signing Date:06.07.2026
17:15:13

month in the first week of the month unless leave of every such
absence is obtained from the learned Trial Court.
vi. Applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity and shall
not communicate with or come in contact with any of the prosecution
witnesses, or tamper with the evidence of the case.
14. The present application is disposed of with the aforesaid terms.
15. Copy of this judgment be sent to the concerned Jail Superintendent
for information and compliance.
16. Needless to say, expression of view(s) on the merits involved, if any,
are solely for the purposes of adjudication of the present bail application
and shall have no bearing on the overall case/ trial involved.



SAURABH BANERJEE, J.
JULY 06, 2026/AB
Signature Not Verified
BAIL APPLN. 2227/2026 Page 7 of 7

Digitally Signed
By:BABLOO SHAH
Signing Date:06.07.2026
17:15:13