Navneet Bhatnagar vs The State on 5 April, 2022

[Cites 6, Cited by 0]

Delhi High Court - Orders

Navneet Bhatnagar vs The State on 5 April, 2022

1. The instant application under Section 439 read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter "Cr.P.C.") has been filed on behalf of the petitioner seeking regular bail in FIR bearing No. 1056/2021 registered at Police Station Paschim Vihar West for offences punishable under Sections 420/120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 66C & 66D of the Information Technology Act, 2000.

2. The brief facts of the case are that an emergency call was received by the Police regarding an illegal centre being operated where people representing themselves as Amazon Agents were duping American citizens on the pretext of purchase of goods and / or cancellation of their orders. The raiding team found some computers and laptops at the premises and also found five persons present there and out of those five persons, three were Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:DAMINI YADAV BAIL APPLN. 702/2022 Page 1 of 6 Signing Date:05.04.2022 17:48:58 engaged in internet calling while two others were sitting for ensuring maintenance of the internet and computer systems. The three persons who were allegedly making the calls were Manish, Ankit Dev and Vipul. The raiding team allegedly seized 15 CPUs, 2 internet routers from the spot as well as 4 mobile phones recovered from the aforementioned three persons. Thereafter, SI Amit Maan sent one of the members of the raiding team to get the FIR registered and the aforesaid three persons were arrested and in their disclosure, they stated that they were working under one Navneet Singh.

3. The petitioner herein approached the concerned Sessions Court seeking anticipatory bail and during the pendency of his anticipatory bail, he was granted interim protection by learned Additional Sessions Judge vide order dated 31st December, 2021.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner submitted that there was no evidence on record to even prima facie show that any foreign citizen was being duped. All the allegations were based merely upon conjectures and surmises. It is further submitted that the initial investigation conducted on the present FIR also shows apparent inconsistencies. Although, it was stated that five persons were present at the spot and were involved in the working of the complete computer setup, however, till date the involvement and role of other two persons have not been stated or explained anywhere while other three persons were arrested. Further, on the basis of their inadmissible disclosure statement, the name of one Navneet Singh was obtained, whereas, no Navneet Singh could be found and finally, the said name was linked to the Petitioner herein. It is important to state that till date, neither any incriminating evidence has been collected by the police in the present case nor any actual victim could be identified. Even the amount Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:DAMINI YADAV BAIL APPLN. 702/2022 Page 2 of 6 Signing Date:05.04.2022 17:48:58 of alleged wrongful loss or wrongful gain has not been ascertained till date. It is also submitted that the co-accused Manish was granted regular bail by the learned Additional Sessions Judge vide order dated 21st January, 2022. While granting regular bail, the learned Additional Sessions Judge has observed that till date the police has failed to point out any victim.

5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner submitted that the learned Additional Sessions Judge failed to appreciate that there is absolutely no proof or basis for the prosecution to claim that the Petitioner herein is the mastermind of the alleged offences. On the contrary, it is a matter of record that the three persons, who were actually found at the spot involved in internet calling during the search / raid, have already been granted bail by the learned Additional Sessions Judge. As such, merely on some inadmissible disclosure statement, the Petitioner cannot be called the mastermind in the present case. It is further submitted that learned Additional Sessions Judge failed to appreciate that at the first instance, the raid/ search itself was illegal since the Investigating Officer chose not to follow the mandatory provisions of Section 100 (4) and (5) of the Cr.P.C. It is an undisputed fact that the building in which the alleged raid was conducted, is fully occupied and it is situated in a densely populated area. Therefore, there was no reason or justification for the IO/ SI Amit Maan for not following the mandatory provisions of Section 100 (4) and (5) of Cr. P.C. and as such, the veracity and genuineness of the raid is itself under suspicion and doubt. It is also submitted that in any case, the police have already seized the computer setups, internet routers, mobile phones etc. However, despite two months having been passed, the police have miserably failed to point out any incriminating material against the Petitioner herein.

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:DAMINI YADAV BAIL APPLN. 702/2022 Page 3 of 6 Signing Date:05.04.2022 17:48:58

6. It is submitted by learned counsel that the petitioner is an innocent person and a law abiding citizen. On instructions, learned counsel undertakes that the petitioner shall abide by any condition imposed by this Court while granting bail. The address of petitioner has already been verified by the State and found to be true and correct. There are no criminal antecedents of the petitioner, who is languishing in judicial custody since 28th January, 2022. The investigation in the present case has not been completed and chargesheet has been filed on 28th March, 2022. Hence, it is prayed that the petitioner may be released on bail.

7. Per Contra, Ms. Kusum Dhalla, learned APP for State vehemently opposed the bail application and submitted that the co-accused Uday Pal joined investigation and during interrogations, disclosed that the petitioner is his close friend and, on his directions, Uday Pal executed a rent agreement of property where the scam unearthed. It is further submitted that during the course of investigation, an excel sheet was recovered from the mobile phone of accused Ankit Dev which was already sent to petitioner through WhatsApp in which the details of victims were found who were supposed to be cheated. The other co-accused Roshan, Anoop@ Eric, Deepanshu, Shivam, and Himanshu are still evading their arrest.

8. Learned APP for State submitted that the investigation is still pending and other co-accused are yet to be apprehended. It is further submitted that custodial interrogation is required to ascertain the cheated amount and number of victims as well as to identify the beneficiary account and the trail of the cheated amount. It is also submitted that the offence is serious and grave in nature and the petitioner is the mastermind. Therefore, the petitioner is not entitled to the concession of bail and if released on the bail Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:DAMINI YADAV BAIL APPLN. 702/2022 Page 4 of 6 Signing Date:05.04.2022 17:48:58 he might influence the trial. However, it is fairly conceded on behalf of the State that there is no previous criminal history of the petitioner. In the instant matter, the chargesheet has been filed.

9. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

10. This Court has perused the contentions made in the application, status report as well as the FIR. There is no previous criminal history of the petitioner. The chargesheet has been filed before the Court concerned.

11. Keeping in view the contentions and the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, the clean antecedents and the period for which he has already been in jail, this Court is inclined to allow the instant petition seeking regular bail. It is accordingly directed that the petitioner be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty-Five Thousand only) with two sureties of like amount to the satisfaction of the Jail Superintendent/Trial Court subject to the conditions as follows:-

(a) he shall under no circumstances leave India without prior permission of the Court concerned;

                                   (b)    he shall appear before the Court concerned as and
                                   when required;
                                   (c)    he shall not directly or indirectly make any

inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case;

                                   (d)    he shall provide his mobile number(s) and keep it
                                   operational at all times;
                                   (e)    he shall commit no offence whatsoever during the
                                   period he is on bail; and


Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:DAMINI
YADAV
                             BAIL APPLN. 702/2022                                                 Page 5 of 6
Signing Date:05.04.2022
17:48:58
                                    (f)    in case of change of residential address and/or mobile

number, the same shall be intimated to the Court concerned by way of an affidavit.

12. Accordingly, the petition stands disposed of.

13. Copy of this order be sent to Jail Superintendent for compliance.

14. It is made clear that any observations touching merits of the case are purely for the purpose of deciding the question of grant of bail by this Court and shall not construed as an expression of final observation in the proceedings pending before Trial Court.

CHANDRA DHARI SINGH, J APRIL 5, 2022 Dy/@k Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:DAMINI YADAV BAIL APPLN. 702/2022 Page 6 of 6 Signing Date:05.04.2022 17:48:58

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Delhi High Court - Orders