MHCC020006452024

IN THE COURT OF CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS AT GRATER BOMBAY
COURT ROOM NO.23 (Presided over by Shri N. P. Tribhuwan, Additional Sessions Judge)
CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.90 OF 2024

Applicant :

Rahul Vinod Dogra
Age : 33 years, R/o : Laxmipuram, Rajpur Chungi, Sadar Bazaar Police Station, Agra,
Uttar Pradesh – 282 001

VERSUS

Respondent :

The State of Maharashtra,
Through Gaondevi Police Station

Mr. Dilip Kokil, learned Advocate for applicant/accused.
Mrs. Ranjana Budhwant, learned APP for the State.

ORDER
(Delivered on 30/01/2024)

This is an application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for releasing accused Rahul Vinod Dogra on bail in Crime No.223/2023 for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 465, 468, 471 of Indian Penal Code and Section 66(c)(d) of Information and Technology Act, registered with Gaondevi Police Station, Mumbai.

2.Heard learned Counsel for accused and learned APP for the State. Perused Bail Application, say/reply and other documents.

3.It is case of prosecution that informant/complainant Smt. Mehru Meenu Billimoria has given complaint/report in Gaondevi Police Station on 15.08.2023. She alleged that while she was searching online sweet shop on google on 15.08.2023, she found mobile number of Tiwari Brothers Sweet Shop. She has made phone call on the said mobile number and given order for the sweet by making payment. But the person who was talking on the said mobile number stated that he has not received the payment and he sent QR Code of Google Pay and asked the complainant to type code 29991. Hence the complainant has typed the said code in the payment app. However, the said caller again stated that he has not received the amount and thus, he again asked the complainant to type the said code. In this way, the informant has typed the said code at three times. Complainant has received the message on
her mobile about the deduction of sum of Rs.737 + 29991 + 29991 + 29991 (total Rs.90,710/-). Therefore, informant has made phone call to the said caller but he avoided to respond. Hence complainant has realized that she came to be cheated by the said caller. Therefore, complainant has lodged the above report/complaint.

4.Learned counsel for applicant argued that prosecution has filed charge-sheet before Learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 40 th Court, Girgaon, Mumbai. Applicant is in custody from 27.09.2023 till today. Applicant is web designer. The absconded accused is main who has given order to the present applicant for preparing design of website. For that purpose, applicant has received consideration of Rs.3500/- from the absconded accused. Applicant has prepared website as per the direction and requirement of absconded accused. Applicant has not committed any offence as alleged. He is not beneficiary of the said fraudulent act. He relied on case law of Sarabjit Kaur v/s The State of
Punjab & another : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 157, wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court observed, “A breach of contract does not give rise to criminal prosecution for cheating unless fraudulent or dishonest
intention is shown right at the beginning of the transaction. Merely on the allegation of failure to keep up promise will not be enough to initiate criminal proceeding”.

5.According to prosecution, if accused is released on bail, there is every likelihood that he will cheat other persons by preparing fake website. Co-accused Rakesh Tiwari yet not found. There may be
many co-accused. The duped sum yet to be recovered. It revealed in investigation that accused has prepared fake websites of many companies by using his domain. Other two crimes regarding cheating by using fake website in the name of Tiwari Sweets are pending in Gaodevi Police Station.

6.The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case law of Amit Sharma Vs. State :2023 LiveLaw (Del) 979 observed that; when this trust in online transaction is shaken, it leaves individuals wary and apprehensive, rendering them vulnerable to financial exploitation. As a result, the public becomes increasingly reluctant to engage in online financial activities, which can significantly impede economic growth,
innovation and financial inclusion.

7.Remand paper shows that during investigation, it revealed that applicant/accused involved in the commission of crime as above. Absconded accused yet not found. Cheated sum yet to be recovered. It
seems that there is network of the accused to cheat the citizens online.

8.Crimes like online cheating, forgery and fraud are very serious non-bailable offences. In recent times, these offences have become much more worrying as they are been conducted through electronic means, it is therefore necessary that strict and prompt action is to be taken against such offences to keep India safe in these times. The act of the accused in connivance with other accused seems to be a
well-planned and cultivated act, which hampers the well-being of a society since such crimes have the effect of alluring innocent people who fall victims into the hands of such fraudsters. Considering the
nature of offence and peculiar facts of this case, it is not desirable to release accused on bail. Hence, I pass following Order.

ORDER

Criminal Bail Application No.90 of 2024 stands rejected.

Date : 30/01/2024 (N.P. Tribhuwan) Additional Sessions Judge, CR.No.23, Gr. Mumbai. 5
Cri BA No.90/2024 Direct dictated on : 30.01.2024 Checked on : 30.01.2024 Signed on : 30.01.2024 “CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER”
30.01.2024 at 5.45 p.m. UPLOAD DATE AND TIME Mrs. K.S.Bhosale NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
Name of the Judge (with CR No.) HHJ SHRI. N. P. TRIBHUVAN (C.R.No.23) Date of announcement of Order 30.01.2024 Order signed by P.O. on 30.01.2024 Order uploaded on 30.01.2024