Rajasthan High Court Calls For Nationwide Awareness Campaign Against Digital Scams, Flags Misuse Of Social Media User Data
Sanchayita Lahkar
The High Court of Rajasthan Single Bench of Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand dismissed the second bail pleas of two accused booked in an alleged online banking fraud case involving multiple cyber complaints and large-value transactions routed through their bank accounts. While noting the continuing rise in digital scams that deprive people of their money, the Court said a public awareness drive should be launched through print, electronic and social media, television and radio to caution users during online transactions. The Bench also recorded concern that some social media companies sell user data that is later misused for cyber offences, and said action should be taken against all delinquents, including such companies. Along with rejecting bail, the Court directed that its order be forwarded to concerned Central and State authorities, the police leadership and the banking regulator for compliance and protective measures.
The matter arose from second bail applications filed by two accused persons who were alleged to be involved in multiple instances of cyber fraud through different bank accounts. Their earlier bail applications, along with that of a co-accused, had been rejected by the High Court with liberty to revive the prayer after completion of investigation. Following completion of investigation and filing of the charge-sheet, the accused approached the Court again seeking bail.
The petitioners contended that the investigation had concluded and that specific sums had been recovered from their respective bank accounts in connection with several cyber complaints. It was submitted that another accused was the main operator of the alleged cyber fraud and that the petitioners’ bank accounts were misused. They also relied on the fact that they were in custody, had no criminal antecedents, and that the case was triable by a Magistrate.
The prosecution opposed the applications, submitting that numerous cyber complaints had been received against the petitioners’ bank accounts. The investigation allegedly revealed that large sums of money were transacted through those accounts during the relevant period. The prosecution argued that the magnitude of the transactions and the number of complaints did not justify grant of bail.
The Court observed that “Over the past few years, there has been a noticeable rise in cyber crimes and frauds globally, with India witnessing thousands of innocent people falling victim to such scams. Many have lost substantial amounts of their hard-earned money to frauds carried out via internet.”
It stated that “In the age of rapid digital evolution, digital scams have emerged as one of the most insidious forms of cyber crimes.” It further recorded that “Digital scams pose a significant threat to our interconnected world, hence, there is a necessity for a multi-faceted approach to combat them effectively. Different countries have adopted legislation, public awareness campaigns, technological innovations and collaborative initiatives to mitigate the risk associated with these scams.” and that “Ultimately, empowering individuals with the knowledge and tools to resist such scams will be of paramount importance in this fight.”
On the material placed with the bail pleas, the Court observed that “Perusal of the case diary as well as conclusion of investigation at page Nos. 20, 21 of the charge-sheet indicates that huge amounts were deposited in the bank accounts of the petitioners between the period from 2024 to 2025 which are running in lakhs of rupees.” It recorded that “Investigation reveals that 9 cyber complaints were received against the bank accounts of accused Vivek Yadav and similarly, 7 cyber complaints were received against the accused Karan Yadav.” and stated that “Whether the petitioners are innocent or their bank accounts were misused by the other accused are the facts which cannot be appreciated by this Court at this stage.”
The Court stated that “a detailed analysis of the evidence and an elaborate discussion on the merits of the case are wholly impermissible at the stage of considering bail.” It recorded that “There is no material change in the facts and circumstances of this case to entertain these second bail applications and grant indulgence of bail to the petitioners.” and concluded that “Considering the gravity of the allegations, the organized manner in which the offence appears to have been executed, and the conclusion of investigation into a wider conspiracy created by the accused persons to grab the hard-earned money of the innocent cyber fraud victims, this Court finds no justification for the petitioners’ enlargement on bail.
The Court directed that “the bail applications are, accordingly, dismissed. Nothing stated herein shall be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the Ministry and Department of Finance of the Centre as well as State Government, the Ministry of Home Affairs of the Centre as well as State Government, the Director General of Police State of Rajasthan, Jaipur and Reserve Bank of India for making necessary compliance and to take more suitable measures to protect customers and innocent persons and their hard-earned money.”
Advocates Representing the Parties
For the Petitioners: Mr. Rajpal Yogi, Advocate, with Mr. Hemant Agarwal, Advocate; Mr. Manish Gupta, Advocate, with Ms. Shewta Soni, Advocate
For the Respondents: Mr. Shree Ram Dhakar, Public Prosecutor; Mr. Naresh Kumar Gupta, Public Prosecutor; Mr. Rameshwar Lal, CI-SHO, Police Station Aravali Vihar, Alwar
Case Title: Vivek Yadav v. State of Rajasthan Connected with Karan Yadav v. State of Rajasthan
Case Number: S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 2nd Bail Application Nos. 16064/2025 & 15712/2025
Bench: Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand
