Cybercrime probes must prioritise recovery of defrauded money: HC

In a significant order aimed at strengthening cybercrime investigations, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has held that the foremost objective of police in such cases must be the recovery of defrauded money by freezing all bank accounts of beneficiaries until the money trail is traced to its end.

Justice Anoop Chitkara’s Bench made it clear that law enforcement was required to act the moment cyber fraud came to light to trace and freeze the financial trail — regardless of whether the amount has been fully recovered.

“In cybercrimes, the first objective of the police department must be to recover the amount involved and keep on freezing all the bank accounts of beneficiaries till the end of the money trail unless the amount is not recovered or frozen,” Justice Chitkara asserted.

The observation came while granting regular bail to an accused arrested in an FIR registered under the provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita at cybercrime police station in Hisar. The complainant had, among other things, alleged that he was duped of Rs 15 lakh after being falsely told that an international parcel in his name containing illegal items had been intercepted. Posing as officials, the fraudsters threatened him with arrest in a money laundering case, extracted his financial details, and coerced him into transferring all funds under the pretext of verification.

After hearing advocate Sanchit Punia for the accused and the rival contentions, Justice Chitkara noted that the petitioner had acted as a “money mule,” having handed over his bank account for a 20 per cent cut. He handed over his account to a co-accused “in the greed of getting 20 per cent payment”

Before parting with the case, Justice Chitkara asserted the police was at liberty to freeze the account; the petitioner had already joined the investigation; and was in custody for the last four months. As such, a case for bail was made out. “There is sufficient prima facie evidence connecting the petitioner with the alleged crime. However, pre-trial incarceration should not be a replica of post-conviction sentencing,” the court concluded.

Haryana Tribune