Chandigarh: Taking a tough stance on the surge in cybercrime, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has refused to grant bail to an accused in a ₹1.18-crore cyber fraud case, describing online fraud as a “serious and growing menace in the digital age.” The court underlined that such offences require a firm judicial response to deter increasingly sophisticated cybercriminals.
The observations were made by Justice Manisha Batra while dismissing a petition seeking regular bail. The accused is alleged to have played an active role in facilitating the fraud by providing bank accounts—both in his own name and those of acquaintances—which were used to route the defrauded money.
Certified Cyber Crime Investigator Course Launched by Centre for Police Technology
According to the prosecution, the complainant was allegedly induced to part with ₹1,18,47,353 on the promise of high returns through purported investment opportunities. An FIR was registered at the cyber police station in Narnaul, Mahendergarh district, following which a detailed investigation was carried out.
“Cybercriminals using sophisticated methods”
Opposing the bail plea, the State told the court that the accused was not a peripheral figure but a key facilitator in the financial trail of the scam. It was argued that he arranged multiple bank accounts that enabled the smooth transfer and layering of fraud proceeds, a tactic commonly employed to evade detection.
During the investigation, police recovered several mobile phones, ATM cards, cheque books, passbooks and SIM cards from the accused and other co-accused, strengthening the prosecution’s claim of organised and deliberate involvement.
Justice Batra, in her order, observed that cybercriminals are increasingly adopting highly organised and technologically advanced techniques to target individuals and institutions alike. Granting bail in such cases, the court noted, could send a wrong signal and embolden offenders operating in the digital space.
Parity with co-accused rejected
The defence sought bail on the ground of parity, arguing that one of the co-accused in the case had already been granted bail. The High Court, however, firmly rejected the argument, holding that the petitioner’s role was materially different and more active than that of the co-accused.
The court pointed out that a perusal of the status report and disclosure statements prima facie indicated the accused’s direct and conscious participation in facilitating the offence. As such, his case could not be treated at par with that of the co-accused who had secured bail earlier.
Gravity of offence weighs against relief
Emphasising the broader societal impact of cyber fraud, the High Court noted that such crimes strike at the very foundation of public trust in digital transactions. The magnitude of the alleged fraud, the organised nature of the operation and the potential punishment upon conviction were all factors that weighed heavily against granting bail.
The court clarified that while it was refraining from making any final observations on the merits of the case, the material on record at this stage did not justify extending relief to the accused.
“Keeping in view the gravity of allegations, the quantum of sentence the conviction may entail, and the attendant facts and circumstances, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petition does not deserve to be allowed,” the order stated.
Clear message on cybercrime
Legal experts say the ruling sends a strong and unambiguous message on how courts are likely to approach cyber fraud cases amid the rapid expansion of digital payments and online financial platforms.
With cybercrime incidents rising sharply across the country, courts are increasingly reluctant to show leniency, particularly where accused persons are found to have enabled fraud by supplying bank accounts, SIM cards or digital credentials.
The High Court’s decision is also seen as a warning to individuals who knowingly or negligently allow their financial instruments to be misused. The court reiterated that cyber fraud is no longer just an economic offence but a serious threat to digital security and public confidence, warranting a strict judicial approach to ensure deterrence.
About the author — Suvedita Nath is a science student with a growing interest in cybercrime and digital safety. She writes on online activity, cyber threats, and technology-driven risks. Her work focuses on clarity, accuracy, and public awareness.
