Proliferation Of Cybercrime Erodes Public Confidence, Runs Counter To Aspirations Of Advanced "Digital Bharat": Punjab & Haryana High Court

The Petition before the High Court was filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) for the grant of pre-arrest/anticipatory bail to the petitioner in a case registered under Sections 318(4) of BNS.

The Single Bench of Justice Sumeet Goel said, “The proliferation of online frauds and cybercrimes poses a significant threat, as it systematically erodes public confidence in digital financial transaction platforms. Such erosion runs counter to the aspirations of an advanced and digitally empowered "Digital Bharat" and thus warrants a heightened degree of judicial circumspection. These offences are characterised by their capacity to aggrieve a multitude of victims simultaneously, often with a single act of commission. The deleterious consequences of cybercrimes transcend individual boundaries, imperiling numerous unsuspecting citizens. The gravity of such transgressions cannot, therefore, be understated.”

Advocate G.S. Thind represented the Petitioner while AAGG Gurmeet Singh represented the Respondent.

Factual Background

The complainant filed a written complaint concerning fraudulent withdrawals from his joint bank account maintained with his wife. He alleged that on August 31, 2024, the complainant received calls purportedly from a bank official, requesting payment of loan interest. The complainant informed the caller that he had already made advance payments toward the loan, and as such, no interest was due. The caller thereafter alleged that the amount had already been withdrawn from the loan account, thus prompting the complainant to visit the branch.

Upon examination of the account statement at the bank, the complainant discovered unauthorized debit transactions amounting to ₹25,00,000. It was further alleged by the complainant that specifically, three transactions of ₹5,00,000 each and two additional transactions of ₹5,00,000 each were recorded on August 10, 2024. These withdrawals were carried out without his knowledge or consent. The complainant suspected that the amount was fraudulently withdrawn by unidentified individuals. On these allegations, an FIR was filed under Section 318(4) of the BNS, 2023.

Reasoning

The Bench noted that in the FIR in question, serious allegations were levelled against the petitioner, and it emerged from the record that the petitioner, in connivance with the co-accused, was alleged to have been involved in the commission of cyber financial fraud against the complainant. It was the stand of the State that the petitioner facilitated the fraudulent activity by permitting the use of his bank account.

It was further noticed that during the investigation, a sum of ₹10,00,000 was transferred into the bank account of the petitioner-accused. “This fact, coupled with other circumstances detailed in the investigation, points towards the active complicity of the petitioner in the alleged offence. The police have further asserted that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is indispensable for the purpose of effectively unravelling the modus operandi of the accused persons, identifying the broader nexus involved in the fraud, and recovering the siphoned amount”, the Bench mentioned.

“The nature and gravity of the offence, involving organized cybercrime and financial deceit, necessitate a thorough investigation, which, at this stage, cannot be conducted without the petitioner being in custody”, it said while also adding, “It is befitting to mention here that while adjudicating the bail pleas, particularly in cases concerning cybercrimes and online fraud, necessitates a meticulous evaluation of several pivotal factors. Paramount among these is the inherent gravity and seriousness of the offense, coupled with its potential societal ramifications.”

In light of the inherent nature and profound gravity of such offences, and their wide-ranging cascading effects on both society and financial institutions, the Court was disinclined to grant the relief of anticipatory bail as prayed for. “To do otherwise would be to turn a Nelson’s eye to the profound and far-reaching detrimental impact of these digital depredations”, it stated.

Thus, finding a reasonable basis for the accusations, the Bench dismissed the Petition.

Cause Title: Suhail v. State of Haryana (Neutral Citation: 2025:PHHC:078633)

Appearance

Petitioner: Advocate G.S. Thind

Respondent: AAGG Gurmeet Singh

Click here to read/download Order