Mumbai, March 5, 2024 – Mohabbat Khursaid Khan has been denied bail by the Additional Sessions Judge, Greater Mumbai, in an extortion and cybercrime case. Additional Sessions Judge Dr. A.A. Joglekar (Court Room No. 37) issued the order on March 4, 2024.
Khan was arrested in connection with C.R. No. 91/2023, registered at the Wadala T.T. Police Station, for offenses under Section 384 (extortion) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 67(A) of the Information Technology Act.
Background and Allegations:
The complainant received a WhatsApp video call from an unknown person on March 23, 2023, showing a woman in a compromising position. Shortly after, an 11-second video with similar images, including the complainant, was sent. The unknown person then demanded Rs. 21,000, threatening to make the video viral. The complainant paid the amount, but further demands led to a total payment of Rs. 1 lakh.
Arguments Presented:
Advocate Iqbal Qureshi, representing Khan, argued that he was falsely implicated and that there was no prima facie evidence of his involvement. He stated that the charge sheet had been filed, the investigation was substantially concluded, and the main accused was still at large. He claimed that Khan, who runs a money transfer business, was implicated based on bank statements showing money transfers to his account, and that further incarceration was unnecessary.
Additional Public Prosecutor (APP) Abhijeet Gondwal, representing the State, opposed the bail, stating that Khan had committed similar offenses and that his custody was required for other cases. He pointed out that Khan, his wife, and daughter had received large sums in their accounts without explanation. The prosecution also raised concerns about absconding, evidence tampering, and witness intimidation.
Court’s Reasoning and Decision:
Judge Joglekar reviewed the application, reply, and documents. He noted that Khan did not deny receiving money in his and his family’s accounts. Khan claimed the transactions were related to his money transfer business, but he did not provide any documents to support this claim.
The court also noted that approximately Rs. 63 lakhs were transferred to Khan’s wife’s and daughter’s accounts, which Khan claimed were his business earnings. The court found this explanation unsatisfactory, especially with the ongoing investigation into these large transactions.
The court referenced the Supreme Court’s stance on economic crimes, emphasizing their wide impact on the country’s economy.
Considering the large unexplained transactions and the ongoing investigation, the court denied Khan’s bail application.
Decision:
Khan’s bail application was rejected.
Order Details:
The order was dictated and transcribed on March 4, 2024, and signed on March 5, 2024. The certified copy was uploaded on March 5, 2024, at 5:10 p.m.
This decision reflects the court’s consideration of the large unexplained financial transactions, the ongoing investigation, and the seriousness of the economic crime allegations.