Chandigarh court dismisses bail plea of man arrested in Rs 56L cybercrime case

Taking note of the “serious” nature of allegations, a local court dismissed the bail application of a man arrested in a cyber fraud case.

Advertisement

The accused, Ramji Lal Meena, had been booked on the case on the complaint of, Ashok Kumar, a resident of Sector 35. The complainant had told the police that he had on December 18, 2024, received a call from a woman who advised him to do online trading through IBKR (Interactive Broker) to earn quick profit. The caller later connected him to the company’s client manager.

After speaking to the manager on the call, the complainant received a link on WhatsApp to download the IBKR application. Thereafter, the manager trained him on buying and selling stocks. He later shared bank account details for depositing money in exchange stocks. The complainant ended up transferring Rs 56,26,000 to different bank accounts on the pretext.

Later, when the complainant showed interest in withdrawing his money, he was removed from the WhatsApp Group and IBKR application.

During the investigation, the police arrested Ramji Lal Meena, but his counsel argued that the accused was falsely implicated, saying that he had no direct role in the creation of fake profiles or fraud, and that he merely dealt in accounts without participating in the actual fraud. However, the public prosecutor strongly opposed the bail on the grounds that the accused was a habitual cyber fraudster operating in a well-knit syndicate. The material collected during investigation, including bank records, and mobile phone recoveries, suggested his deep involvement.

After hearing of the arguments the court of Judicial Magistrate First Class Kaushal Kumar Yada dismissed the bail application.

The court said the allegations against the accused were serious in nature and pertains to organised investment fraud.

The role of the accused, Ramji Lal Meena, as revealed from disclosure statements and financial transactions, prima facie indicates active participation in facilitating alleged fraudulent transactions, it added.

The court also took note of the apprehension raised by the prosecution regarding tampering with evidence or threatening of witnesses, adding that in view of the gravity of the offence, the organised nature of the crime, and the need for further custodial investigation, it did not find it to be a fit case for grant of regular bail at this stage.