Yesterday, On 30th April, The Delhi High Court classified sextortion as a significant societal danger, highlighting its severity. This categorization underscores the urgent need for legal and social measures to combat this harmful activity. The court’s stance reflects growing concerns about digital exploitation and underscores the need for robust legal frameworks to protect individuals.
New Delhi: Justice Amit Mahajan of the Delhi High Court, in a recent order, highlighted the grave nature of sextortion, describing it as a major societal threat and a deep violation of individual privacy. He emphasized the complex challenges it presents to law enforcement, particularly due to its cross-jurisdictional aspects, while denying anticipatory bail to three individuals accused of such acts.
In his detailed remarks, Justice Mahajan noted,
“Sextortion not only represents a profound violation of privacy but also stands as a significant social menace. This crime involves the malicious exploitation of private intimate images and videos to extort money or other favours from victims, frequently leading to severe psychological trauma.”
He stressed the serious impact on the victims’ psychological health and highlighted the critical need for safeguarding their privacy and dignity in these situations.
Justice Amit Mahajan , addressing the complexities of sextortion, emphasized the profound impact this cyber-enabled crime on both individual dignity and law enforcement. He noted the secretive and cross-jurisdictional characteristics of these crimes, which complicate legal intervention, asserting that “bail cannot be granted routinely” in such cases due to the gravity of the offenses involved.
Elaborating on the specifics of the case, Justice Mahajan detailed how the complainant was coerced into paying Rs 16 lakh after being entrapped in a staged “private” video call by individuals posing as police and YouTube officials. The perpetrators exploited the situation by threatening to release the video on social media and further intimidated the complainant by falsely implicating him in a concocted suicide narrative involving the woman from the video.
The prosecution argued against granting pre-arrest bail to the three accused, highlighting their involvement in an organized crime syndicate dedicated to the systematic execution of sextortion schemes.
In its ruling, the Delhi High Court observed that the ongoing investigation revealed a pattern of criminal behaviour by the accused, unearthing multiple complaints that indicated their recurrent involvement in sextortion. The court remarked on the extensive scope of these operations, describing them as “humongous.”
Justice Amit Mahajan detailed the method employed by the accused,
“In the present case, the accused allegedly orchestrated a scenario where a woman initiated contact with the victim via video calls and messages, during which they obtained a compromising video clip of him. Subsequently, they threatened to disseminate the video on social media platforms.”
He further explained how the situation escalated,
“The victim was later misled to believe that the woman who appeared in the video had tragically taken her own life.”
This deceit part of their strategy to intensify pressure on the victim.
The court also noted the accused’s deceptive tactics, stating,
“The individuals involved posed as police officers, complete with forged identification cards.”
A review of the National Cyber Reporting Portal showed that 10 similar complaints had been filed against the same individuals, employing the same tactics, clearly indicating a systematic pattern rather than isolated incidents.
Upon reviewing the evidence, including the use of the accused’s SIM cards in over 50 different devices over two years and the linkage of their digital records to the crime, the court found sufficient preliminary evidence of their involvement. As a result, Justice Mahajan dismissed the anticipatory bail applications, citing the strong prima facie case against the accused.
Read Also: [BREAKING] “Conspiracy Against Prime Minister is Treason”: Delhi HC
The court noted that the disclosure statements from a co-accused needed further investigation, which was hindered by the lack of cooperation from the applicants. As a result, granting them anticipatory bail would severely interfere with the ongoing investigation.
The court emphasized the importance of conducting a thorough investigation to unravel the complex scheme purportedly utilized by the applicants and other implicated parties. It emphasized that such complex cases typically require thorough investigation and custodial questioning, which should not be prematurely interrupted.
Furthermore, the court highlighted that bail should not be granted as a matter of routine, particularly in cases where it might be used defensively by the applicants to obstruct justice.
The court declared,
“An order of bail cannot be granted routinely so as to allow the applicant to use the same as a shield,”