Mumbai, February 9, 2022 – Rajesh Ramkishan Kumar, a resident of Delhi, has been denied bail by the Sessions Court for Greater Bombay in a multi-million rupee cyber fraud case. Additional Sessions Judge R.M. Sadrani (Court Room No. 37) rejected the bail application on February 8, 2022.
Kumar was arrested in connection with C.R. No. 72 of 2021, registered at the North Cyber Police Station, Mumbai. He is accused of offenses under Sections 419 (cheating by personation), 420 (cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property), 465 (forgery), 467 (forgery1 of valuable security, will, etc.), 468 (forgery for purpose of cheating), and 471 (using as genuine a forged document or electronic record) of the Indian Penal2 Code (IPC), and Sections 66(c) (identity theft) and 66(d) (cheating by personation by using computer resource) of the Information Technology Act.3
Background and Allegations:
The complainant, Chandramohan Narayan Renikuntha, a 64-year-old retired MTNL employee, was allegedly duped of Rs. 72,15,514 between February 11, 2017, and January 5, 2021. The prosecution alleges that Kumar and his co-accused lured the complainant with promises of a large bonus on his matured LIC policies. They then induced him to purchase additional policies and subsequently convinced him to pay various taxes to receive the purported benefits, using forged letters purportedly issued by the Reserve Bank of India (RBI).
The money was allegedly transferred through 64 transactions to 15 different bank accounts. The accused also sent the complainant a forged cheque of Rs. 15 lakhs via WhatsApp to further deceive him.
Arguments Presented:
Advocate Ajit Kumar (also known as Alok Kumar), representing Kumar, argued that his client was arrested on December 29, 2021, and approximately Rs. 6 lakhs were recovered from him, along with 12 mobile phones, 10 debit cards, and a laptop. He also argued for parity, citing the bail granted to co-accused Rahul by the Magistrate’s Court. He further stated that his client’s parents are senior citizens and have cancer.
Additional Public Prosecutor (APP) Abhijeet Gondwal opposed the bail, stating that the investigation was still ongoing and Rs. 20 lakhs had been frozen in various accounts, including Kumar’s. He alleged that Kumar and co-accused Anand Kumar operated a fake call center in Delhi and employed others to make fraudulent calls. He also alleged that Kumar provided a sim card under a false name to Anand Kumar and that they opened 15 fictitious bank accounts to receive the defrauded money. He emphasised the forged RBI logo and cheques.
Court’s Reasoning and Decision:
Judge Sadrani considered the evidence, including the recovery of numerous electronic devices, indicating Kumar’s involvement. The court noted the use of forged RBI logos and the elaborate conspiracy involved in the crime.
The court rejected the argument of parity, stating that co-accused Rahul’s role was different, as he had sold genuine policies. The court also dismissed the argument based on Kumar’s parents’ illness, stating that it was not a sufficient ground for bail in such a serious offense.
Considering the ongoing investigation and the gravity of the offense, the court concluded that it was not a fit case for granting bail.
Order Issued:
The court rejected Kumar’s bail application, concluding that granting bail at this stage would impede the ongoing investigation. The order was signed on February 9, 2022, and uploaded on the same day at 3:15 p.m.
This decision reflects the court’s concern over the seriousness of the alleged cyber fraud, the ongoing investigation, and the need to prevent further tampering with evidence or witnesses.