‘Serious Cyber Fraud’: Delhi HC Refuses Relief To Man In Digital Arrest Scam

The Delhi High Court has rejected an anticipatory bail plea filed by a man whose bank account was allegedly used to receive funds from a victim of a “digital arrest” scam, observing that custodial interrogation was necessary to uncover the full modus operandi of the alleged fraud.

A bench of Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma said the investigation required further examination of the transactions routed through the applicant’s account.

Suspicious Transactions Flagged By Court

The court noted that approximately ₹1.5 crore had been credited to and withdrawn from the bank account of the applicant, Om Kant Gupta, between September 2024 and March 2025.

Justice Sharma observed that the applicant had not filed any complaint regarding the transactions during that period.

The court said this prima facie undermines the claim made by Gupta’s lawyer, Divyakant Lahoti, that his client was unaware of the transactions taking place in his account.

Court Calls It A ‘Serious Instance Of Cyber Fraud’

In its order dated March 11, the court highlighted the gravity of the allegations, describing them as a “serious instance of cyber fraud.”

“Such offences are carried out through technological means to deceive and extort money from unsuspecting victims, as noticed by the Supreme Court. Such cases are increasingly being reported across the country,” the court said.

The order was made public on Thursday.

Police Opposed Anticipatory Bail

The Delhi Police opposed the anticipatory bail application.

Additional public prosecutor Naresh Kumar Chahar told the court that Gupta had been issued a notice to join the investigation last year but had not complied with it.

Woman Allegedly Coerced Under ‘Digital Arrest’

The case was registered following a complaint by a woman from Greater Kailash in south Delhi.

According to the complaint, she received a WhatsApp call on March 15, 2025, during which the caller accused her of money laundering.

The caller allegedly identified himself as a surveillance officer and told the woman that she had been placed under “digital arrest” on the orders of the Supreme Court of India. She was then coerced into transferring ₹1.3 crore into two bank accounts.

Funds Routed Through Applicant’s Account

One of the accounts that received ₹30 lakh was operated by Gupta.

Justice Sharma noted that the amount credited to Gupta’s account on March 18, 2025, “was transferred on the very same day to multiple other bank accounts.”

FIR Registered Under Multiple Sections

Following the complaint, a First Information Report (FIR) was registered under several provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, including:

• Section 308(2) – Extortion
• Section 318(4) – Cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property
• Section 319(2) – Cheating by personation
• Section 204 – Personating a public servant
• Section 61(2) – Criminal conspiracy

The FIR also invoked Section 3(5) of the law.