The Supreme Court refused pre-arrest bail to a chartered accountant accused in a massive ₹640 crore cyber fraud and money laundering case. Upholding the Delhi High Court’s order, the Court directed the accused to surrender within 10 days, backing the ED’s demand for custodial interrogation.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Wednesday refused to grant anticipatory bail to a chartered accountant accused in a massive ₹640 crore cyber fraud and money laundering case. The top court upheld the earlier order of the Delhi High Court and directed the accused to surrender before the investigating agency within 10 days.
A bench of Justices MM Sundresh and Augustine George Masih dismissed the plea filed by chartered accountant Bhaskar Yadav, who was seeking protection from arrest in a case being investigated under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA). The Court agreed with the findings of the Delhi High Court, which had rejected his anticipatory bail application on February 2.
The Delhi High Court had dismissed the pre-arrest bail pleas of both Bhaskar Yadav and Ashok Kumar Sharma in a detailed 22-page judgment. While refusing relief, the High Court made serious observations about the nature and scale of the alleged money laundering operation.
In its order, the High Court observed that there was an “intricate mesh of laundering of money”, and said that the Enforcement Directorate’s request for custodial interrogation of the accused could not be considered unreasonable.
The High Court further stated,
“The accused/applicants, being skilled professionals, have allegedly crafted laundering of proceeds of crime across multiple layers, and to unearth the same, I find substance in the submission of learned counsel for DoE (Directorate of Enforcement) that custodial interrogation is much required,”
the HC said.
Clarifying that the matter was not merely about cryptocurrency dealings, the High Court noted,
“It is not a case of mere dealing in cryptocurrency, which per se is not a crime in this country and the liability of the accused persons is confined to paying tax on the crypto transactions. The present cases exhibit a vast intricate mesh of movement of money, fraudulently extracted out of pocket of gullible investors, who appear to be primarily belonging to middle class,”
it had added.
The High Court also balanced the issue of personal liberty with the need for effective investigation. It observed that while individual liberty is important and protected under the Constitution, it cannot override the need for a proper investigation in cases involving serious economic offences affecting the country’s financial system.
The Court also took note of serious allegations against the accused, including fresh complaints that they allegedly assaulted investigating officers, attempted to bribe local police officials to settle cyber fraud complaints, and destroyed electronic evidence. These factors weighed heavily against the grant of anticipatory bail.
ALSO READ: Digital Arrest Scams Must Be Stopped: Supreme Court Directs CBI to Act Immediately
The money laundering case arises from two FIRs registered by the Economic Offences Wing (EOW) of the Delhi Police. These FIRs relate to an alleged cyber fraud racket involving approximately ₹640 crore. According to the Enforcement Directorate (ED), the fraud money was generated through illegal online betting, gambling platforms, fake part-time job offers, and phishing scams.
The ED has earlier stated that funds collected from unsuspecting investors were siphoned off through more than 5,000 mule bank accounts across India. These funds were then transferred and layered through complex transactions before being uploaded onto PYYPL, a UAE-based digital payment platform.
As per the investigation, part of the cheated money was withdrawn in cash from Dubai using debit and credit cards issued by various Indian banks. The agency has alleged that the entire operation was carried out through a coordinated network involving certain chartered accountants, company secretaries, and crypto traders who allegedly worked together to launder the proceeds of crime.
The Supreme Court’s refusal to grant anticipatory bail means that the accused must now surrender and face custodial interrogation.
The case highlights the judiciary’s strict approach in dealing with large-scale financial frauds and money laundering cases, especially those involving complex cross-border transactions and digital payment platforms.
The investigation by the Enforcement Directorate is ongoing, and further action will depend on the outcome of custodial interrogation and analysis of electronic and financial evidence.
Click Here to Read More Reports on Cyber Scam
