Justice Girish Kathpalia, Delhi High Court
Harsh Reality That Gullible Often Fall Prey To Religious Inducements: Delhi High Court Denies Bail To Man Accused Of ₹5.63 Cr Fraud
|Man was accused of duping a woman and her children of over ₹5.63 crore by exploiting their faith in a religious preacher.
The Delhi High Court has noted that individuals who are emotionally or financially vulnerable often become easy targets for manipulation under the guise of spiritual or religious guidance.
The observations came as the Court dismissed a plea for anticipatory bail filed by a man accused of defrauding a woman and her children of more than ₹5.63 crore. The accused allegedly misused the influence of a religious preacher to repeatedly extract substantial sums of money from the complainant. Both the accused and the victims were reportedly followers of this preacher and attended religious gatherings at a temple located in Chhatarpur.
A Bench of Justice Girish Kathpalia described this as a "harsh reality" that cannot be overlooked. It said, “One cannot ignore the harsh reality of our society where gullible individuals facing the rough weathers in life fall prey to such inducements in the name of religious preachers.”
Out of sensitivity to the beliefs of numerous devotees and disciples associated with the preacher, the Court refrained from disclosing the preacher’s name or title. However, it pointed out that the spiritual status attributed to the preacher had clearly played a role in convincing the woman to hand over money. The accused allegedly persuaded her that, inspired by the preacher’s blessings, her investments would yield large profits and resolve her problems.
The Court expressed concern over the lack of transparency regarding the funds. According to the Investigating Officer (IO), the accused failed to offer any credible explanation about how or where the collected funds were invested. Although the accused eventually made a vague claim that the money was invested in cryptocurrency, he did not furnish any specific details or evidence to support this assertion.
Initially, the accused did not cooperate with the investigation, ignoring repeated summons. Later, he reportedly absconded, fleeing to an undisclosed location. The Investigating Officer confirmed that the accused was no longer participating in the inquiry, which prompted the prosecution to argue that custodial interrogation was essential to trace the movement of the defrauded funds.
Agreeing with the prosecution, the Court concluded that the gravity of the allegations, the amount involved, and the accused's non-cooperative behavior warranted custodial investigation. As a result, the request for anticipatory bail was denied. “As rightly submitted by learned prosecutor, custodial investigation is necessary in this case in order to track down the trail of cheated money,” the Court added.
Cause Title: Manu Wahdwa v. The State, [2025:DHC:2776]
Appearance:
Petitioner: Advocate Hirein Sharma
Respondent: Advocates Nawal Kishore Jha, Abhimanyu Sharma