Madras High Court
R. Pradeep Babu vs The State Rep.By Its, The Inspector Of ... on 9 April, 2026
CRL OP No. 8914 of 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 09-04-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN
CRL OP No. 8914 of 2026
R.Pradeep Babu
..Petitioner(s)
Vs
The State Rep.by its,
The Inspector of Police,
CCD-II, District Cyber Crime,
Erode.
Cr. No.05/2025
..Respondent(s)
Criminal Original Petition has been filed under Section 482 of the
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, to pass an order enlarging
the petitioner on bail, in the event of their arrest in Crime No.05 of 2025 on the
file of the Respondent police and pass such other further order.
For Petitioner(s): Mr.Laksharam .S
For Respondent(s): Mr.P.Dhileepan
Government Advocate
(Criminal Side)
ORDER
The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for offences punishable under Section 66D of the Information Technology Act, 2000 read with Section 318(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, in Crime No.05 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.
__________ Page1 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 8914 of 2026
2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant, a retired manager, lodged a complaint on the National Cyber Crime Portal. It is alleged that on 19.11.2024, the complainant was lured into a WhatsApp group titled "Trading Titans of Dalal Street – 27." On the advice of individuals identified as Ravi Sharma and Ravi Bhatra, the complainant invested in IPOs through a fraudulent application titled "Smart Global Securities (SGS)." Between 31.12.2024 and 10.02.2025, the complainant transferred a total sum of Rs.45,58,000/- into various bank accounts provided by the accused. Upon realizing that the platform was fraudulent and that he could not withdraw his funds, the complainant filed a report on 14.02.2025. Hence, the case.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the that the petitioner is a part-time trader based in Dubai, operating through the "Binance" application. He contends that the petitioner’s involvement is limited to the legitimate buying and selling of USDT (cryptocurrency). It is submitted that one Mr.Ramki approached the petitioner to invest money to the tune of Rs.5,90,000/-, which was transferred from a third-party account. The petitioner, acting as an intermediary, converted the said amount into USDT without any knowledge of the illegal source of the funds or the underlying cyber-fraud. He further submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated and that the respondent police have targeted him merely because his account was used for a __________ Page2 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 8914 of 2026 cryptocurrency transaction. Consequently, he prays for the grant of anticipatory bail.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent police, while reiterating the prosecution's case, strongly opposed the grant of anticipatory bail. He submitted that the complainant was cheated of Rs.45,58,000/- after being promised 300% profits. He further submitted that during a house search conducted at the petitioner's premises, incriminating passbooks and a cash-counting machine were seized, suggesting deep involvement in money laundering activities. Further, the learned Government Advocate pointed out that the petitioner has 20 previous cases of a similar nature pending against him across India, indicating he is a habitual offender in cyber-crime syndicates. He also noted that the anticipatory bail plea of a co-accused has already been dismissed by the Vacation Sessions Judge, Erode, in Crl.M.P. No.1321 of 2025.
5. Considering the gravity and nature of the offence, which involves a sophisticated cyber-fraud resulting in the loss of a substantial sum of Rs.45,58,000/, and taking into account the seizure of incriminating materials, including a cash-counting machine from the petitioner’s premises, this Court finds the matter serious. Furthermore, the petitioner’s extensive criminal antecedents, involving 20 previous cases of a similar nature across the country, __________ Page3 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 8914 of 2026 suggest a deep-rooted involvement in organized cyber-crime syndicates rather than a mere accidental transaction as an intermediary. Since the complexity of the financial trail and the need to unearth the wider network involved in this pan-India scam, this Court is of the opinion that custodial interrogation is necessary for an effective investigation. Consequently, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail at this stage.
6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.
09-04-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No Jeni __________ Page4 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 8914 of 2026 To
1.The Judicial Magistrate No.III, Erode.
2.The Inspector of Police, CCD-II, District Cyber Crime, Erode.
3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras, Chennai.
__________ Page5 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 8914 of 2026 C.KUMARAPPAN, J.
Jeni CRL OP No. 8914 of 2026 09-04-2026 __________ Page6 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis