The Delhi High Court on Monday rejected anticipatory bail applications filed by two Chartered Accountants in connection with a large-scale cyber fraud and money laundering case involving transactions exceeding ₹100 crore, emphasizing that custodial interrogation is crucial to uncover the full extent of the alleged offence.
Justice Girish Kathpalia declined pre-arrest bail to the accused, Bhaskar Yadav and Ashok Kumar Sharma, noting that they had failed to satisfy the mandatory “twin conditions” under Section 45 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA). The court observed that there were no reasonable grounds to believe that the accused were not guilty or unlikely to commit further offences if granted pre-arrest protection.
Certified Cyber Crime Investigator Course Launched by Centre for Police Technology
The case originates from a prosecution complaint filed by the Enforcement Directorate (ED), following investigations based on multiple FIRs registered in cyber fraud cases, including investment scams and employment-related frauds. The ED alleged that an organised criminal syndicate with international links defrauded unsuspecting victims and laundered the proceeds through thousands of mule bank accounts, before routing funds abroad and converting them into virtual digital assets.
The High Court noted that investigators had identified thousands of suspicious bank accounts across Indian banks, which were allegedly used to layer illicit proceeds via debit cards, overseas withdrawals, and digital platforms, revealing a complex, multi-layered laundering network.
Rejecting the defence claim that the transactions involved only lawful digital asset dealings, the court observed that the allegations pointed to a “vast and intricate mesh” of fraudulent money laundering targeting ordinary members of the public. The accused were alleged to be part of a Delhi-based group controlling multiple accounts and entities to channel and conceal tainted funds.
Court analysis revealed that dozens of bank accounts linked to a limited number of mobile numbers had collectively routed nearly ₹100 crore overseas, with over ₹65 crore connected to accounts operated by the applicants. In several instances, the accused were found operating across multiple layers of the laundering chain, including directly receiving funds from actors abroad.
Advocates representing the ED, including Anurag Jain, Vivek Gurnani, Kanishk Maurya, and Satyam Prakash, opposed the bail pleas, arguing that custodial interrogation was vital. They alleged that the accused had destroyed electronic evidence, wiped devices, assaulted enforcement officials during searches, and bribed local police to settle cyber fraud complaints, posing a serious risk to ongoing investigations.
The High Court also rejected the plea for parity with co-accused who had secured regular bail, noting that those cases were factually distinct and did not involve a request for custodial interrogation. Observing that the rigours of Section 45 PMLA were fully attracted, the court dismissed both anticipatory bail applications, allowing the ED to proceed with custodial interrogation as the probe continues.
The case underscores the growing sophistication of cyber fraud and cross-border money laundering networks, highlighting the challenges for Indian authorities in tracking, investigating, and prosecuting complex financial crimes involving digital assets and international channels.
About the author – Ayesha Aayat is a law student and contributor covering cybercrime, online frauds, and digital safety concerns. Her writing aims to raise awareness about evolving cyber threats and legal responses.
