Telangana High Court
V.Vijaya Bhasker Reddy vs The State Of Telangana on 4 August, 2025
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE J. SREENIVAS RAO
CRIMINAL PETITION No. 7401 of 2025
ORDER:
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhitha, 2023 (for short 'BNSS') seeking transit anticipatory bail to the petitioner/accused No.8 in Crime No.13 of 2024 on the file of the CID T.G. Police Station, Hyderabad (Now CID Regional Office, Karimnagar) for the offences punishable under Sections 420 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short 'IPC'), Section 5 of the Telangana Protection of Depositors and Financial Establishment Act, 1999 (for short 'TPDFE Act') and Section 5 of the Prize Chits and Money Circulation scheme (Banning) Act, 1978 (for short 'PCMCS Act').
2. The case of the prosecution in brief is that on 28-10-2024 at 17:00 hours, the complainant, lodged a petition at CID PS Hyderabad, wherein he stated that in 2022, the accused A-1 was introduced to him by his friend Y.S. Ravi Kumar Reddy of Cherinai, Tamil Nadu. A-1 claimed to have a high-return investment opportunity through a new crypto currency project called G.B.R Coin, which he said would be widely used in real estate and other sectors. A-1 explained five 2 investment packages promising high daily returns and gave various assurances at meetings held in ITC Hotel Chennai and Marigold Hotel, Ameerpet, Hyderabad. He created a WhatsApp group to share bank account details and links, and the complainant and others invested based on his promises. The complainant invested Rs. 4 lakhs, another investor Anjaneyulu invested Rs.8 lakhs, and around 43 others invested a total of approximately Rs.95 crores through cash and bank transfers to the accounts of A-1, his wife A-2 and others. Some amounts were routed through Ravi Kumar Reddy, who transferred the funds to A-1 and associates. Initially, the investors could see their investments and trade GBR Coins on the GBR website. The coin's value rose from $0.10 to $3 in a few months. However, the trading platform was later shut down, and A-1 claimed technical issues and promised to shift investments to a new platform. These promises were never fulfilled. Upon inquiry, it was found that the GBR website was fake and created to deceive investors. Only Rs.30 to 35 crores were returned, while the rest was allegedly misappropriated. The complainant alleges that A-1 and others conspired and cheated him and other investors by fraudulently collecting money in the name of the GBR Coin. Based on the said complaint, the present crime was registered for the above said offences.
3
3. Heard Mr. M.P.Kashyap, learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent -State.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has not committed the offence and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submitted that there are no specific allegations against the petitioner to attract the ingredients of the alleged offences. The only allegation made against the petitioner is that he assisted accused No.1 in creating the fake website, i.e., www.gbrrglobals.io. The petitioner has not received any money from the de-facto complainant, the victims, or from Accused No.1 and petitioner's wife received an amount of Rs.10,440/- from Golden Bear Reality as on today. He further submitted that accused Nos.1, 6, 7, 11 and 12 were enlarged on regular bail and accused No.2 was enlarged on anticipatory bail. He further submitted that basing upon the statement given by accused No.1 only, petitioner was implicated in the present crime as accused and the same is not permitted under law. He further submitted that the petitioner is not having any other criminal antecedents and he is ready and willing to cooperate with the investigation and abide by the conditions which are going to be 4 imposed by this Court and hence prayed for grant of anticipatory bail.
5. Per contra, the learned Additional Public prosecutor submitted that the petitioner has committed grave offence and in conspiracy with accused No.1 and other accused, the petitioner created fake website and received huge amount over Rs.95 crores from the innocent depositors, under the guise of GBR Coin and the petitioner, along with the other accused, has failed to return the amounts collected from the victims. He further submitted that during the course of investigation, it reveals that petitioner is having 10 percent share in the said business. He further submitted that the petitioner has been absconding since the date of registration of the crime i.e., from 28.10.2024 and if the petitioner is released on anticipatory bail at this stage, he may tamper with the evidence and may threaten the witnesses, and hence, prayed to dismiss the petition.
6. Having considered the rival submissions made by the respective parties and after perusal of the material available on record, it reveals that the petitioner, along with the other accused, under the guise of GBR Coin, created a fake website and collected a huge amount nearly Rs. 95 crores from the innocent victims. 5 Thereafter, the said website was shut down, and the accused failed to return the promised amounts, and all of them absconded. The specific case of the prosecution is that, after collecting huge amounts from the victims under the guise of a GBR Coin scheme through a fake website, the petitioner and the other accused failed to refund the said amounts. It is also the prosecution's specific allegation that the petitioner is having 10 percent share in the above said transactions.
7. During the course of hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has not received any amount, and only his wife received an amount of Rs. 10,440/-, from the Golden Bear Realty. He also submitted that the petitioner did not receive any money either from the victims or from accused No.1 or from the other accused. These aspects will be revealed during the course of investigation.
8. It is settled law that in serious offences involving large-scale fraud or public finance crimes, granting bail to the accused persons defeats the interests of the victims. In the case on hand, there are serious and specific allegations against the petitioner that he along with other accused have collected huge amount of Rs.95 crores under the scheme of GBR Coin by creating fake website and subsequently 6 failed to return the invested amounts to the victims. Even according to the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, the investigation is under progress and the charge sheet has not yet been filed.
9. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and the gravity and seriousness of the offences, this Court is of the considered view that this is not a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner/accused No.8.
10. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is dismissed.
Miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed.
_____________________ J. SREENIVAS RAO, J Date: 04.08.2025 vsl