Anticipatory bail denied in ₹80 lakh ‘digital arrest’ cyber fraud case; compromise no ground in serious economic offences: Rajasthan HC

Jaipur: The Rajasthan High Court has refused to grant anticipatory bail to an accused in a high-value cyber fraud case involving a so-called “digital arrest” scam, holding that compromise between parties cannot be a ground for relief in serious economic offences having wider societal impact.

The Court observed that the allegations disclose a well-organized international cyber fraud racket involving multiple mule accounts, hawala transactions, and cryptocurrency layering, warranting a strict approach at the stage of bail.

The judgment was delivered by Justice Sameer Jain in S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 3107/2026, Naveen Temani vs State of Rajasthan, arising out of FIR No. 12/2024 registered at Cyber Police Station (ATS & SOG).

The case pertains to offences under Sections 308(6), 318(4), 319(2), 111(4) and 204 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

The prosecution alleged that an 83-year-old woman was subjected to a “digital arrest” scam and coerced into transferring ₹80 lakh from her bank account. The Court noted that the victim suffered severe mental trauma, depression, and prolonged hospitalization following the incident.

According to the State, the accused was a key conspirator in an international cyber crime network. The defrauded money was routed through as many as 34 mule accounts across layered transactions, with 187 related complaints registered on the cyber portal. The funds were allegedly transferred through hawala channels to foreign jurisdictions, including Dubai, and used to purchase cryptocurrency such as Bitcoin and USDT.

The investigation also revealed that 18 persons had already been arrested, including the applicant’s father and other co-accused. The Court recorded that custodial interrogation, recovery of electronic devices, and further probe into the wider conspiracy were still necessary.

The applicant, on the other hand, argued that the dispute was commercial in nature and that a compromise had been reached with the complainant. It was contended that he was a bona fide individual residing in Dubai and that the cryptocurrency transactions were part of personal dealings.

Rejecting these submissions, the Court held that the compromise was not even signed by the applicant himself but by his father, and in any case, offences of such nature cannot be treated as purely private disputes. The Court relied on settled Supreme Court jurisprudence that serious economic offences and organized cyber frauds cannot be quashed or diluted merely on the basis of settlement.

The Court further observed that the magnitude of the offence, vulnerability of the victim, and transnational nature of the operation clearly indicated a grave and organized criminal activity, and granting anticipatory bail at this stage would impede the investigation.

Accordingly, the High Court held that no case for anticipatory bail was made out and dismissed the application.

Taking note of the complainant’s precarious financial condition, the Court invoked its inherent powers under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and directed the trial court to consider, with sensitivity and promptitude, any application for release of the seized amount of ₹13,40,790.

The trial court was directed to decide such application within seven days, while safeguarding the interests of the trial. The State was also directed to provide necessary assistance to ensure that the victim is not subjected to further hardship.

Case Title:
Naveen Temani vs State of Rajasthan

Case Number:
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 3107/2026

Court:
High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan, Jaipur Bench

Bench:
Justice Sameer Jain

Date of Order:
01 April 2026

Advocates:
For Petitioner: Mr. Amit Jindal, Mr. Hemant Vijay
For State: Mr. Rajesh Choudhary (GA-cum-AAG), Mr. Aman Kumar (AAAG), Mr. Vivek Sharma, Mr. Manvendra Singh Shekhawat, Ms. Neha Goyal and others