In a bail application filed before the Delhi High Court regarding a FIR registered under Sections 318(4), 61(2), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS), a Single Judge Bench of Justice Girish Kathpalia allowed the bail application and directed the applicant to be released on bail.
The applicant received Rs. 1,40,000/- in his bank account, which was allegedly the cheated amount. On 11-03-2025, upon complaint on NCRP, and e-FIR was registered. During investigation, the complainant stated that he got in touch with a girl through Bumble App and that they exchanged mobile numbers, after which they started having conversations on WhatsApp. It was mentioned that the girl allured him to invest in Centurymarket Trading App after which he invested Rs. 25,000/- which ultimately escalated to Rs. 1,90,000/-.
However, when the complainant wanted to withdraw the profits, he was unable to do so. Upon contacting the girl, she connected him with the customer support who informed him that his trading account had been frozen and that he was required to deposit Rs. 2,65,965/-. Realizing that this was a fraud, he lodged a complaint on NCRP.
The accused informed the Court that despite detailed observations in the previous orders, there was no honest investigation and that he had been languishing in jail since past 10 months. It was submitted that the account in which the alleged amount had been received was opened as he was about to enter into a business deal, and that since he was not an experienced
ALSO READ: Delhi High Court Grants Time to Amitabh Bachchan to Formalise Settlement in Personality Rights Suit
The Court noted that even the updated status report reflected the investigation status as standstill and conveyed an impression that the investigation was not being carried out with any sincerity despite observations in previous orders. It was further stated that the updated status report reflected nothing but sham paperwork by the IO to somehow justify the prolonged incarceration of the applicant. It was noted that no serious efforts had been made to trace the co-accused persons.
It was stated that since nothing concrete had been done by the IO in the past 10 months, keeping the accused in jail did not appear to be justified. The Court noted that the managers of the Bumble App did not respond to multiple notices of the IO and no action had been taken by the IO against those managing the Bumble App to trace the co-accused. The Court stated that despite months of investigation, no screenshot of any conversation or call logs between the complainant and the co-accused girl regarding Bumble App or the Trading App had been obtained by the IO even from the complainant’s mobile phone.
Further, the Court noted that even though the other co-accused had not joined the investigation till date, the IO had not taken any action. The Court found substance in the applicant’s submission that the IO was only carrying out paperwork and taking no serious steps. The Court also did not find the applicant’s incarceration appropriate based on another case in Jaipur. Hence, the bail application was allowed and the applicant was directed to be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with one surety in the like amount.
