Chandigarh, March 30, 2025: The Punjab and Haryana High Court rejected an anticipatory bail plea in a high-profile cybercrime case involving financial extortion and impersonation of law enforcement officials.
The court, presided over by Justice Manjari Nehru Kaul, highlighted that such offenses eroded public trust in digital transactions, necessitating custodial interrogation to unravel the conspiracy behind the large-scale fraud.
The case stemmed from a petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) by the accused, Tabrej @ Tarif, seeking anticipatory bail.
The plea was linked to an FIR registered at the Cyber Crime Police Station, Bhiwani, under Sections 419 (cheating by impersonation), 420 (cheating), 170 (impersonating a public servant), 384 (extortion), 20, 204, and 120-B (criminal conspiracy) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
The court dismissed the plea, citing the gravity of the offence and the petitioner’s alleged role in a well-orchestrated criminal syndicate.
The Modus Operandi
The complainant, an elderly individual, fell victim to a meticulously planned extortion racket. According to the FIR, he received a video call from an unknown woman who manipulated him into an inappropriate act while secretly recording him.
Subsequently, a person posing as a Delhi Crime Branch officer contacted the complainant, alleging that an obscene video featuring him had been uploaded to YouTube and threatened legal action.
The fraudster then directed him to a supposed “YouTuber” who demanded hefty payments to remove the video.
Under duress, the complainant transferred approximately ₹36,84,300 across multiple bank accounts in several transactions. Each payment was followed by fresh demands under pretexts like purchasing foreign “stamps” for procedural formalities.
The investigation revealed a syndicate involving multiple perpetrators, including the petitioner, who allegedly facilitated the financial transactions.
Court’s Reasoning
Justice Manjari Nehru Kaul, in her order, underscored the severity of the cyber crime, noting its sophisticated nature and the calculated exploitation of victims’ vulnerabilities.
“The modus operandi reveals a deliberate and premeditated plan to defraud unsuspecting persons by leveraging their fear and social stigma,” the court observed.
The petitioner’s counsel, Advocate Satish Chaudhary, argued that his client was not named in the FIR and had no prior criminal record.
However, the court dismissed these contentions, stating that the absence of antecedents or delayed FIR registration does not warrant anticipatory bail in such grave cases.
The bench highlighted that the investigation had unearthed financial links tying the petitioner to the crime, corroborated by bank records, call logs, and digital evidence.
“Custodial interrogation is imperative to unearth the full extent of the conspiracy, identify other accused, trace the proceeds of crime, and prevent recurrence of such frauds,” the court ruled, rejecting the bail plea.
Case Details
- Cause Title: Tabrej @ Tarif v. State of Haryana
- Neutral Citation: 2025:PHHC:037053
- Bench: Single Bench of Justice Manjari Nehru Kaul
- Petitioner’s Advocate: Satish Chaudhary
- Court: Punjab and Haryana High Court
- Date of Order: March 30, 2025
Follow The Legal QnA For More Updates…