Mumbai, April 25, 2024 – Rahul Vinod Dogra, a 33-year-old resident of Agra, Uttar Pradesh, has been denied bail by the Sessions Court for Greater Bombay in an online fraud case. Additional Sessions Judge N.P. Tribhuwan (Court Room No. 23) issued the order on April 24, 2024.
Dogra was arrested in connection with C.R. No. 236/2023, registered at the Gaondevi Police Station, for offenses under Section 420 (cheating) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Sections 66(c) (identity theft) and 66(d) (cheating by personation using computer resource) of the Information Technology Act.
Background and Allegations:
The complainant, Meena Kapil Dhavan, reported that she was defrauded of Rs. 66,083 after ordering sweets online from a fake “Tiwari Brothers Sweet Shop” website. She was tricked into scanning a QR code and entering a confirmation code, which resulted in multiple deductions from her account. Dogra is alleged to have designed the fraudulent website.
Arguments Presented:
Advocate Sheela Gupta, representing Dogra, argued that he was a web designer who created the website at the behest of an absconding accused and was not involved in the fraud. She emphasized that Dogra had been in custody since September 19, 2023, and that the charge sheet had been filed.
Additional Public Prosecutor (APP) Ranjana Budhwant, representing the State, opposed the bail, arguing that Dogra’s release would enable him to create more fake websites for fraudulent activities. The prosecution also highlighted that the absconding accused was still at large, the defrauded money had not been recovered, and Dogra had allegedly created fake websites for other companies. They further mentioned that three other related cases of fraud using fake “Tiwari Sweets” websites were pending at the Gaondevi Police Station.
Court’s Reasoning and Decision:
Judge Tribhuwan referred to a Delhi High Court ruling emphasizing the severity of online fraud and its impact on public trust in online transactions. He noted that Dogra was allegedly involved in creating fake websites for multiple companies and that other related cases were pending.
The court concluded that online fraud, forgery, and cheating are serious offenses, especially when conducted through electronic means. It emphasized the need for strict action against such crimes. The court found that Dogra’s alleged involvement in creating the fraudulent website, in connivance with others, constituted a well-planned act that harmed society by deceiving innocent people.
Order Details:
The bail application was rejected. The order was directly dictated, checked, and signed on April 24, 2024. The certified copy was uploaded on April 25, 2024, at 4:35 p.m.
This decision reflects the court’s consideration of the severity of online fraud, Dogra’s alleged role in creating the fraudulent website, the pending related cases, and the need to protect public trust in online transactions.