Mumbai. A sessions court has granted bail to an accused in the ₹58.13 crore “digital arrest” cyber fraud case, observing that the prosecution did not present sufficient independent evidence to directly link him to money laundering or fund transfer operations. The court noted that the case against him appeared to rely largely on the statement of a co-accused.
Businessman Allegedly Targeted Through Fake Official Calls
The case was registered at the nodal cyber police station after a businessman filed a complaint in October 2025. According to the complaint, fraudsters impersonated officials from regulatory and investigative agencies, including telecom regulators and cyber crime authorities.
FCRF Academy Launches Premier Anti-Money Laundering Certification Program
The victim was allegedly kept under continuous audio and video surveillance pressure in a fabricated “digital arrest” scenario. Under threats of legal action and sustained psychological coercion, he was reportedly made to transfer funds in multiple instalments.
₹58.13 Crore Routed Through Layered Bank Accounts
Investigators said the total amount siphoned off reached ₹58.13 crore and was routed through a complex network of bank accounts to conceal the money trail. Probe agencies claimed that around ₹15.25 crore was routed through an account linked to a Gujarat-based entity.
One of the arrested accused, identified as Bipin Giri Ramesh Giri Goswami, was taken into custody in November 2025. Investigators alleged that he provided access to bank account details of a mechanical works firm, which were later used to channel large sums of money into different accounts.
Court Cites Lack of Independent Evidence
During the bail hearing, the defence argued that there was no direct documentary or electronic evidence establishing the accused’s active role in the alleged fraud. It submitted that the case was mainly based on statements made by a co-accused and lacked corroboration from independent material evidence.
After reviewing the records, the court observed that the prosecution had not placed sufficient material linking the accused directly to fund transfer operations or alleged laundering activity. It also noted that another accused in the same case had already been granted bail, making the principle of parity relevant.
The court held that continued detention could not be justified solely on allegations when independent and credible evidence was lacking. The investigation is continuing, with authorities working to trace the complete money trail and identify others allegedly involved in the suspected cyber fraud network.
