Bail denied in organized cyber fraud involving mule accounts and multi-state financial transactions.

The applicant filed his first bail application following his arrest on February 8, 2026, in connection with Crime No. 33/2026

The prosecution alleged that the applicant facilitated the opening of bank accounts for others, which were subsequently misused for cyber fraud

Investigations by the National Cyber Crime Reporting Coordination Portal revealed that approximately ₹7 Crores were illegally transacted through these "mule accounts," with funds being transferred from victims across various states

The Investigating Officer’s affidavit stated that the applicant couriered SIM cards and bank documents to associates in Rajasthan and was a direct beneficiary of the organized cybercrime syndicate

Whether the applicant is entitled to the grant of regular bail under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, given the stage of investigation and the nature of the allegations

The Court considered Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), regarding the high court's power to grant bail

The substantive charges were under Sections 318(4) (cheating), 61(2)(A) (criminal conspiracy), and 111 (organized crime) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS)

The court balanced the gravity of the offense, the potential for the accused to influence evidence or abscond, and the ongoing nature of the investigation in organized financial crimes

The Court evaluated the applicant’s plea of innocence and cooperation against the specific findings in the Investigating Officer’s affidavit

It noted that the transaction details revealed an organized cyber fraud network involving ₹7 Crores, where the applicant allegedly recruited "mule account" holders and managed the logistics of SIM cards and bank kits

The Court found that the applicant was a "beneficiary" of the fraud and noted the State’s concern that his release would allow him to alert associates or destroy evidence

Given that the charge-sheet had not yet been filed and the offense was serious and organized in nature, the Court determined that judicial intervention for bail was premature

The first bail application was rejected

The Court directed a copy of the order to be sent to the trial court for compliance