Bail Denied Where Bank Account Was Voluntarily Provided to Facilitate Organized Cyber Fraud and Monetary Benefit.

The applicant sought regular bail after being arrested on January 3, 2026, in connection with an online share-trading fraud

The complainant alleged he was cheated of ₹26,68,141/- via Facebook and WhatsApp groups, with ₹6,10,000/- specifically traced to the applicant’s Bandhan Bank account

The applicant claimed the account was for a new business, he believed the deposit was a loan, and he had voluntarily joined the investigation

An affidavit from the Investigating Officer revealed that the applicant’s account was flagged in multiple cybercrime reports across various states (Tamil Nadu, Telangana, Delhi, Gujarat, Kerala, and Karnataka) on the National Cyber Crime Reporting Portal

Whether the applicant is entitled to regular bail under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, considering the nature of the allegations and his lack of criminal antecedents.

Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 (corresponding to Section 439 of the CrPC) regarding regular bail

Sections 318(4) (cheating) and 3(5) (joint liability/common intention) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS)

The court also evaluated the principles of "incriminating evidence" and the impact of organized cyber fraud on the society when determining bail eligibility

The court balanced the applicant’s lack of prior criminal history against the gravity of the evidence presented by the State

It relied heavily on the Investigating Officer's affidavit, which demonstrated that the applicant’s bank account served as a "mule account" used to receive proceeds from cyber fraud across multiple jurisdictions

The court noted that the applicant had explicitly admitted to providing his bank documents and registered mobile number to third parties in exchange for "commissions," facilitating the execution of online frauds

Despite the applicant's defense of a legitimate business loan, the court found the evidence of collusion with an organized cybercrime gang and the multi-state nature of the complaints to be sufficient grounds to deny liberty at this stage

The court held that the applicant’s admitted involvement in providing bank accounts for fraudulent activities and his role as a beneficiary in an organized cyber fraud network outweighed the mitigating factor of having no prior criminal record

The trial court was directed to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously