Kangan Court Denies Bail to Three Accused in Multi Crore Online, Financial Fraud Case
The Hon,ble Munsiff Court Kangan, presided over by Hon,ble Judge Mr Moonis Wahid, on Monday rejected the bail plea of three accused allegedly involved in a multi-crore online fraud case currently under investigation.
The accused Shahnawaz Ahmad Shah, Rumaisa Jan, and Amir Bashir Magray were arrested in connection with FIR No. 28/2025 registered at Police Station Kangan. They have been booked under Sections 316(5), 318(4) and 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) for their alleged involvement in an organised cyber financial scam estimated to exceed 51 crore.
During the hearing, the prosecution, represented by Public Prosecutor Alyas Khawaja, strongly opposed the bail applications, citing the seriousness and scale of the alleged fraud, the ongoing investigation, and the examination of prosecution witnesses.
The prosecution also informed the court that one of the co-accused is currently absconding abroad and that a supplementary charge sheet is yet to be filed.
Investigators have reportedly identified several bank accounts linked to the accused that were previously flagged following complaints received by cyber police units . Authorities also uncovered thousands of UPI transactions, suggesting an organised network involved in large-scale online financial fraud affecting numerous victims.
While rejecting the bail pleas, the Hon,ble court observed that economic offences of such magnitude have far-reaching societal consequences and require a strict judicial approach. It further noted that public interest must outweigh individual liberty in cases involving organised financial fraud targeting large numbers of people.
The court also highlighted the growing threat of online trading and gaming-related frauds, remarking that such schemes often exploit addiction-like behaviour among users and can cause significant social harm.
The Court remarked that societal interest is more important than the individual liberty and thus bail application deserves outright rejection in this case.
Taking into account the gravity of the alleged offence, the possibility of influencing witnesses or tampering with evidence, and the ongoing investigation into financial transactions and bank accounts, the court ruled that the accused are not entitled to bail at this stage.(Ground Reality)
