Pranav B Prem

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has denied regular bail to a woman accused in a cyber sextortion case, emphasizing the “terrifying and dehumanizing violation” involved in such crimes, where explicit content is secretly recorded and used for blackmail. A Single Bench of Justice Sandeep Moudgil dismissed the third bail petition filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), by the accused, stating that her release would “greatly harm the investigation and would impede the prospects of unearthing all the ramifications involved in such online fraud and scam.”

Case Background

According to the FIR, the complainant, a 73-year-old doctor, was targeted in a well-orchestrated sextortion scheme. On August 8, 2024, he received a WhatsApp video call from a woman who, after engaging him in explicit activity, allegedly recorded his nude visuals without his knowledge. Soon after, he was contacted by individuals posing as law enforcement officials who falsely claimed that the woman had committed suicide and that the complainant was now implicated. Under threats of having his video leaked, he was coerced into transferring over ₹1.34 crore into various bank accounts. The complainant stated: "Out of fear of public disgrace, I kept losing all my savings, and I didn't know what to do. I was so frightened and ashamed that I couldn't tell anyone about it." Upon realizing he had fallen victim to cyber fraud, he lodged a complaint on the National Cyber Crime Portal.

Court’s Observations

Justice Moudgil expressed serious concerns over the rising trend of cyber sextortion, stating: "Such acts are currently the highest reported form of image-based sexual abuse, a form of online blackmail which has been growing in prevalence since 2021. What is concerning are the recent incidents of sextortion which are not entirely surprising given the increase in online social interactions during lockdowns, particularly by way of online dating. The predators deceive and manipulate the gullible person mostly teenagers by engaging them in explicit activity over video, secretly record it, and threaten to post such clips online if the victim does not make up to their financial demands. This terrifying and dehumanizing violation feeds on victim’s shame." The Court further noted the severe emotional impact of such crimes, observing: "The emotional results for victims — especially kids — is devastating. Feeling embarrassed, hopeless and isolated, many of victims have nowhere to turn and some even go so far as to take their own lives without knowing that help is available."

Denial of Bail

The prosecution submitted that the accused was an active participant in the conspiracy. Investigations revealed that a sum of ₹6 lakh, part of the extorted money, was recovered from her residence. Additionally, she was found to have facilitated financial transactions for the co-accused, who conducted the cyber fraud. The Court remarked: "There are evidence of threatening and blackmailing the complainant on WhatsApp and in the chain of investigation, a sum of Rs.6 lakhs from the money extorted from the complainant…has been recovered from the house of the petitioner in Jaipur."

The Court also highlighted the growing involvement of juveniles in such crimes: "As is evident from the facts of the present case and challan filed by the police, it can be seen that adolescents are being involved in taking over the operation as the experienced hands fell to the police net and since the Juvenile Act, 2015 hands light punishment to minors, they are a handy resource for fraudsters." Addressing the broader implications, the Bench noted: "Umpteen number of cases with similar fact patterns have been reported on the National Cyber Reporting Portal, where unsuspecting individuals have fallen victim to such criminals like the accused persons using an identical modus operandi. This suggests that the present case is part of a larger pattern of criminal activity, rather than an isolated incident."

The Court ultimately held that granting bail would not be in the interest of justice, stating: "It is disquieting to learn the implications of arming the petitioner with the regular bail, who has been confronted with allegations of this nature involving well-orchestrated conspiracy of sextortion, which would undoubtedly greatly harm the investigation and would impede the prospects of unearthing all the ramifications involved in such online fraud and scam. Indeed, the public interest also would suffer as a consequence." Thus, the Court dismissed the bail petition, emphasizing the severity of the offense and the need for stringent measures against such cyber crimes.

Cause Title: Jaibuna @ Jai Bhuna V/S State of Haryana 

Case No: CRM-M-1289-2025 (O&M)

Bench: Justice Sandeep Moudgil

[Read/Download order]