The Punjab and Haryana High Court has said courts must exercise greater caution while considering bail in cyber fraud cases, citing the seriousness of such offences, the complexity of investigations and their wider impact on society. The court made the observation while denying bail to Sushil Kaushik, an accused in a December 2025 cyber fraud case registered by the cyber station police of Chandigarh.
The court said there was a high probability of the petitioner continuing similar unlawful activities and repeating a similar offence if released on bail. It observed that although bail is ordinarily the rule, the allegations in the present case were serious and of an “exceptional character”.
Credit Card Fraud Complaint Led to Investigation
According to a complaint filed by Pankaj Kumar on October 28, 2025, he received a phone call from a woman who identified herself as Simran Sharma and claimed to represent the credit card department of a prominent bank.
The woman allegedly asked him to pay ₹170 to convert his existing card to a different bank card, promising an enhanced credit limit of ₹4.5 lakh and better reward points. After he opened a link sent to him, ₹170 was debited from his card.
The complainant later received another call on November 4, 2025, along with a WhatsApp link. Believing the caller’s claim that he would receive a higher credit limit on a new card, he opened the link. His phone was subsequently hacked, according to the complaint, and he received messages showing debit transactions of ₹1.53 lakh and ₹19,500 from his card.
Police traced people allegedly involved in the cyber fraud syndicate using customer application forms and call detail records. In January, co-accused Pratima, Rashmi and Juhi were apprehended. They were allegedly working at a call centre and had been assigned to make fraudulent calls.
Police alleged that Kaushik arranged and supplied bank accounts and SIM cards through which the defrauded money was received and fraudulent calls were made. Kaushik was arrested on January 22, while the alleged kingpin, Ajay Singh Mann, was arrested on January 7.
Police Cite Bank Account and SIM Evidence
Opposing the bail plea, police alleged that Kaushik had procured the bank account and SIM cards and that his involvement was supported by technical evidence.
Police told the court that the SIM allegedly used in the commission of the offence had been issued in Kaushik’s name. His mobile number was also linked to the bank account allegedly used for receiving the defrauded money.
The prosecution maintained that Kaushik was not merely associated with the alleged operation but had performed an important logistical role in arranging the infrastructure required by the syndicate.
The court noted that Kaushik had been in custody for the previous six months but said the seriousness of the allegations had to be considered alongside the period of incarceration.
High Court Flags Risk of Repeat Offence
The court observed that Kaushik was alleged to be an integral member of an organised cyber fraud syndicate. His bank account and mobile phone were allegedly used to siphon money from the complainant’s bank account, while he was accused of arranging mule bank accounts and SIM cards through fraudulent means.
Considering the evidence against him, the nature and substance of the allegations and the role attributed to him, the court held that the case was not fit for granting bail despite the period already spent in custody.
The High Court also cited the possibility of the accused repeating similar conduct after release, observing that the risk of him committing the same offence while on bail was high.
“In crimes such as the present one, which are on the rise, the courts are required to exercise greater caution,” the court said while rejecting the bail plea.
