Bail Denied Where Bank Account Was Habitually Provided to Organized Crime Syndicates for Cyber Fraud Activities

The applicant, Mohd. Siddique, was arrested in connection with Crime No. 358/2025 for allegedly providing his bank account (Bank of Maharashtra, Baikunthpur Branch) to an organized group for cyber fraud

Investigation revealed that the account received ₹9,000 on January 5, 2024, directly linked to a cybercrime complaint (No. 31901240002626) filed in Maharashtra

An additional affidavit by the Investigating Officer disclosed that since its opening on January 3, 2024, the account saw total credits of ₹2,16,773 and debits of ₹1,80,998, indicating its use as a "mule account" for illegal transactions across multiple states

The applicant sought regular bail, arguing he had no direct role in the fraud, no recovery was made from him, and the charge-sheet had already been filed

1. Whether the applicant is entitled to regular bail under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, considering the nature of the allegations involving organized cyber fraud and the use of a mule account.

The court primarily applied Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) regarding the grant of regular bail

The substantive charges were under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS), specifically Section 111 (Organized Crime), Section 317(2) (Stolen property), Section 371(4) (Habitually dealing in stolen property), and Section 317(5)

The legal principle applied was that the gravity of the offense, the organized nature of the crime, and the impact on society are critical factors in determining bail eligibility

The Court analyzed the evidence presented in the Investigating Officer’s additional affidavit, which detailed the transactional history of the applicant's bank account

It noted that the account was opened just days before receiving fraudulent funds and showed high-volume transactions (over ₹2 Lakhs in credits) that were inconsistent with legitimate use

The Court observed that the applicant was "instrumental" in the operation by providing his account to deceive innocent people and misappropriate funds

Despite the applicant’s claim of no direct involvement in the cheating process, the Court found that the "mule" nature of the account facilitated widespread cybercrime in an organized manner

Consequently, the gravity of the allegations outweighed the factors of prolonged detention and the filing of the charge-sheet

The Court directed the trial court to proceed with and conclude the trial expeditiously