Massive Digital Arrest Scam: Mumbai Court Takes Strict Stand
In a significant development in one of India's largest cyber fraud cases, a Mumbai magistrate court has rejected the bail applications of six accused involved in the staggering Rs 58 crore digital arrest scam that targeted a 72-year-old trader. The court dismissed their claims of being unaware victims who had merely lent their bank accounts to friends for tax-saving purposes.
The case came to light last month when the Maharashtra cyber police arrested 21 individuals for allegedly impersonating officials from the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI). The elaborate scheme involved placing the elderly victim under what investigators term as 'digital arrest' - a sophisticated form of online intimidation and extortion.
Accused Claims Dismissed by Court
Among those denied bail were Imran Shaikh and Shaikh Shahid Abdul Salam, who claimed their accounts were used as mule accounts without their knowledge. Imran Shaikh argued in his bail plea that he had transferred, withdrawn, and handed over his account to co-accused without any personal gain. Similarly, Salam told the court that the Rs 7.07 lakh found in his account actually belonged to a friend.
Another accused, Abdul Nasir Abdul Karim Khully, maintained that he had no role in blackmailing the victim and had only permitted the use of his wife's bank account after being told it would help save taxes. Brothers Arjun and Jetharam Kadvasara claimed the company account used for transferring the fraud amount didn't belong to them, and not a single paisa was transferred into their personal accounts, describing themselves as 'victims of circumstances'.
The youngest accused, 22-year-old Naved Shaikh, argued that since the investigation was complete and the maximum punishment under the invoked sections was seven years, his further custody wasn't necessary. He also pointed out that Rs 8 lakh of the alleged amount had already been recovered.
Police Opposition and Court Reasoning
The police strongly opposed all bail applications, citing the enormous amount involved - Rs 58,13,50,000 - and the likelihood of the accused committing similar crimes if released. Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate V R Patil, in his orders, emphasized the gravity of the offense and the increasing prevalence of such digital crimes.
"Prima facie, the record shows that the account of the applicant has been used for commission of the crime. The informant was cheated for the amount of Rs. 58,13,50,000. It is a very huge amount. It is an offence relating to digital arrest. Nowadays, such types of offences are increasing," the magistrate observed in one of the orders.
The court also noted that since the investigation is ongoing and the charge-sheet hasn't been filed yet, it would be inappropriate to release the accused at this stage. "The role of the applicant/accused cannot be attributed unless a charge-sheet has been filed by the prosecution. Till today, the charge-sheet has not been filed. Considering the gravity of the offence, stage of the investigation, it will not be appropriate to release the accused on bail at this juncture," the court stated in all its orders.
Rising Threat of Digital Arrest Scams
This case highlights the growing sophistication of cyber criminals in India who use psychological manipulation and authority impersonation to extract massive sums from vulnerable targets. The 'digital arrest' tactic involves creating a false sense of legal emergency, where victims believe they are under official investigation and must comply with demands to avoid arrest.
With digital fraud cases on the rise across the country, this ruling sends a strong message about the judicial system's approach to dealing with such sophisticated cyber crimes. The court's refusal to accept the 'unaware victim' defense indicates a stricter interpretation of accountability in financial cyber crimes.
As investigations continue, authorities are likely to uncover more details about the network behind this elaborate scam and possibly identify more individuals involved in what stands as one of the most significant digital fraud cases in recent Indian history.
