Vineet Jhavar v. State
In the High Court of Delhi
B.A. 3856/2022
Before Justice S.K. Sharma
Decided on February 13, 2013

Relevancy of the Case: Bail application in a case involving blackmailing and extortion of victims after giving them instant loans through a mobile app

Statutes and Provisions Involved

• The Code of Criminal Procedure (Section 439)
• The Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Section 420, 384, 385, 468, 471, 120B)

Relevant Facts of the Case

• The police registered an FIR against the applicant for scamming people by sending SMS messages regarding loans.
• The applicant used to send messages and a link to people for loans. Clicking on this link will download a mobile application, Express Loan, to their phone.
• After downloading the app, people enter their Aadhaar and PAN card details to start the loan application process. After this, they would receive some amount in their bank account. The app developers could access the contacts on the user’s device.
• After availing of the loan amount, victims started getting threatening calls from the app developers.
• During the inquiry, it was found that many complaints were registered against the alleged app. Further, the scam amount stood at a total of ₹140 crores.
• The accused had many bank accounts, and once the scam was committed, he used to leave his last address to escape.

Prominent Arguments by the Advocates

• The applicant’s counsel argued that the applicant is the sole earning member of the family. The co-accused persons are on bail. The applicant has only received ₹2.11 lakhs, and the police have seized the entire alleged amount.
• The respondent’s counsel argued that Zuhaib Hussain was the prime accused and the first person arrested in the last week of July 2022. Anil Kumar Chahar and Yu Zhang were the co-accused persons. The court had granted them bail as the police filed chargesheet in time.

Opinion of the Bench

• The modus operandi of cyber criminals is changing daily and cannot remain immune to everyone.
• People download apps without being aware that they could lose money once they give access to their contacts and images to cyber criminals.
• The court noted the applicant’s involvement in two other similar cases. The police had registered multiple complaints against him.
• Furthermore, the total amount of extorted money is enormous. Moreover, the accused had tried to escape during the investigation.

Final Decision

• The bench rejected the bail application.