Bail application of cyber fraud accused turned down

Kanpur: The additional sessions judge (court number X), Kanpur Nagar, Nitya Nand Srinet on Thursday dismissed the bail application of cyber fraud accused Sandeep Kumar Sharma, who has been charged for misappropriation of funds, cheating and criminal conspiracy by the cyber cell police station.The presiding judge in his order observed that cyber criminals withdrew a sum of Rs 6 lakh from the account of the complainant through Telegram app via mobile number. The cyber criminals deposited the cheated funds in four accounts. The accused cheated the complainant under the garb of a travel company and the cheated sum was deposited in the accounts of Rani Vishal Rathore, Hari Trading, Abhihsek and Prakash Babu Kalal. Name of the accused came to light during the investigation and charges of cheating, misappropriation of funds and criminal conspiracy were added. The police record and investigation revealed that a sum of Rs 1.43 lakh was transferred from Rani’s HDFC bank. The accused had failed to give any satisfactory explanation in the court. Moreover, the prosecution also depicted three criminal cases of similar nature to the accused ,the judicial official observed.Prima facie, it appeared that the accused had committed an alleged offence. The nature of offence was of serious nature and the grounds mentioned for bail were not sufficient, hence without making any comment on merits of the case, the bail application was liable to be dismissed.The complainant’s advocate Ambarish Tandon opposed the bail application and pleaded that there was sufficient evidence against the accused. He had lodged an FIR about fraud without any delay. The accused was a hardcore criminal and cyber fraud was his profession. He had asked the complainant to transfer money in the account of Rani and later transfer the funds into his account.The police had seized the account of the accused, who had accumulated the funds in the account.The accused in his bail application had submitted that he was innocent and the complainant had deposited the amount in his account to fabricate him.