Supreme Court Denies Bail to Cyber Fraud Accused, Says Such Offenders Must Be Dealt with Firmly
The Supreme Court of India on Wednesday refused to entertain a plea from an accused seeking the clubbing of multiple cyber fraud cases and the grant of bail, observing that individuals involved in such offences must be dealt with firmly. A Bench led by Chief Justice Surya Kant described cyber fraudsters as “parasites” who prey on unsuspecting citizens, and remarked that the interests of society are better protected when such accused remain in custody.
“You people are parasites... You take money from investors and dupe them. We have to be very harsh on you. Society’s interest is there only when you are inside jail and not outside,” the Bench, also comprising Justice V. Mohana, observed during the hearing.
The court was hearing a petition filed by Manoj Kumar Singh, who is facing multiple cases of cheating and cyber fraud registered in Bihar, Tamil Nadu, and Jammu and Kashmir. The cases were lodged by the Jammu Police and the Tirupur Police in Tamil Nadu earlier this year. In his plea, Mr. Singh informed the court about the pending cases across different States and expressed apprehension that more could be filed in the future. He sought interim protection from the court.
The Bench took note of the alleged pattern followed by cyber fraud accused, observing that they often commit offences in one State and then move elsewhere to avoid detection and arrest. “You are hardened criminals whose victims are spread pan-India. You cheat someone in Tamil Nadu and then go to Jammu,” the Chief Justice said. Consequently, the court declined to grant any interim relief and observed that Mr. Singh was at liberty to approach the jurisdictional High Court for appropriate remedy.
The matter comes against the backdrop of growing concern over digital arrest scams. In October last year, a Bench headed by Chief Justice Kant had taken suo motu cognisance of the increasing menace of such organised cyber frauds, wherein criminals impersonate law enforcement or judicial officers to extort money using forged court orders. The court’s intervention followed a letter from a septuagenarian woman in Ambala, Haryana, detailing how she and her husband were duped of nearly ₹1.5 crore by conmen posing as officials of the Central Bureau of Investigation, the Enforcement Directorate, and judicial authorities.
During those proceedings, the Chief Justice had observed that the judiciary would pass stringent orders to strengthen investigating agencies in tackling such offences. Following the court’s intervention, several States began referring major digital arrest fraud cases to the CBI. That matter remains pending before the Supreme Court.
