The Punjab and Haryana high court (HC) has flagged that considering the serious nature of allegations, complexity of the investigation and impact of such offences on society, the courts are required to be extra cautious in granting bail in cyber syndicate fraud cases.
Event Context
“There is a high probability of the petitioner continuing similar unlawful activities and repeating a similar offence once enlarged on bail,” it said while denying bail to one Sushil Kaushik, an accused in December 2025 criminal case registered by the cyber station police of Chandigarh.
During the investigation, police traced the persons involved in the cyber fraud syndicate on the basis of the customer application form and call detail records. In January this year, co-accused Pratima, Rashmi and Juhi were apprehended, who were working at a call centre and had been assigned to make fraudulent calls. The petitioner arranged and supplied bank accounts and SIM cards, through which the defrauded amounts were received and fraudulent calls were made, the police had claimed, adding that he was arrested on January 22, and racket’s kingpin Ajay Singh Mann was arrested on January 7.
The police, while opposing the bail plea, had claimed that it was the petitioner who procured the bank account and SIM cards, and his involvement was corroborated by technical evidence. The SIM used in the commission of offence was issued in his name and his mobile number was also linked with the bank account utilised for receiving the defrauded money, the police said while seeking dismissal of his plea.
The court observed that though bail is the rule, the case against the petitioner is of “exceptional character”. It noted that he has been in custody for the last six months and allegations against him are “serious”.
Match Outlook
“He is alleged to be an integral member of an organised cyber fraud syndicate. His bank account and mobile phone were used to siphon off money from the complainant’s bank account. He is alleged to have performed a crucial logistic and operational role in arranging mule bank account and SIM card through fraudulent means,” it said, adding that considering the evidence against him, the nature and substance of the allegations and the role attributed to him, this is not a fit case for granting him bail despite the period of incarceration undergone by him.
“The possibility of him repeating the same offence once on bail is high,” it said, adding, “In crimes such as the present one, which are on the rise, the courts are required to exercise greater caution.
