Punjab & Haryana HC Grants Bail to Accused Who Allegedly Scammed Rs. 1.33 Crore Posing as Customs Officer
Punjab and Haryana High Court grants bail to a man accused of Rs. 1.33 crore online fraud involving fake CBI and Customs officers.
In a recent ruling, the Punjab and Haryana High Court granted bail to a man accused of being involved in a Rs. 1.33 crore online scam by posing as officials from the Customs Department and the CBI. The case arose from a complaint filed by an elderly advocate who received a WhatsApp call in November 2024 from someone claiming to be from Bombay Customs. The caller alleged that a...
In a recent ruling, the Punjab and Haryana High Court granted bail to a man accused of being involved in a Rs. 1.33 crore online scam by posing as officials from the Customs Department and the CBI.
The case arose from a complaint filed by an elderly advocate who received a WhatsApp call in November 2024 from someone claiming to be from Bombay Customs. The caller alleged that a parcel linked to the complainant contained narcotics.
The call was then transferred to others who claimed to be officials from the Bombay Police and the CBI. They falsely told the complainant that a financial fraud involving Rs. 32 crore was committed using a fake bank account in his name and that his cooperation was needed in the investigation.
The caller then instructed the complainant, who was 78 years old at the time, to liquidate his fixed deposits and transfer the amount to a bank account supposedly held by the CBI Court for verification. Trusting the caller’s instructions, the complainant transferred a total of Rs. 1.33 crore from his and his wife’s accounts between November 19 and 26, 2024. When he later realised it was a scam, he reported the matter to the police.
The petitioner, Anoop alias Anup, was not named in the original FIR but was arrested after Rs. 5 lakh from the defrauded amount was traced to his bank account. His counsel argued that he had been falsely implicated, was not part of the conspiracy, and had already been in custody for over six months.
The counsel also argued that extended custody before trial would cause unnecessary harm to him and his family. They further argued that the petitioner had no direct role in the fraud and that Rs. 2 lakh had already been recovered.
The government counsel argued that the petitioner had received money from the fraud and that the allegations were serious.
The single-judge bench comprising Justice Anoop Chitkara observed that although the petitioner was not named in the FIR, there was evidence linking him to the case. The court also observed that pre-trial custody should not be treated like punishment. Considering the 6 months he already spent in custody, the seriousness of the charge, and other facts, the court granted bail.
The court directed that the petitioner be released on bail, provided he is not required in any other case, and on furnishing bonds to the satisfaction of the trial court. The writ petition was allowed.
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
