Unregistered Agreement Of Sale Entered Before Attachment Cannot Defeat Decree-Holder’s Claim: Andhra Pradesh High Court No Presumption That Joint Family Possesses Joint Property; Female Hindu Absolute Owner Of Property Purchased In Her Name: Allahabad High Court Age Determination Must Strictly Follow Hierarchy Of Documents Under JJ Act: Orissa High Court Acquits Man Of POCSO Charges Once 'C' Form Declarations Are Signed, Burden Shifts To Buyer To Prove Payment Of Outstanding Dues: Madras High Court Section 213 Succession Act No Bar To Eviction Suit If Claim Is Based On Landlord-Tenant Relationship, Not Title Under Will: Bombay High Court Meritorious Candidate Wrongfully Denied Appointment Entitled To Notional Seniority & Old Pension Scheme: J&K & Ladakh High Court 6-Year Delay In Propounding Will & Hostile Attesting Witness Constitute 'Grave Suspicious Circumstances': Delhi High Court Refuses Probate Section 319 CrPC Power Cannot Be Exercised Based On FIR Or Section 161 Statements: Allahabad High Court Quashes Summoning Of Unmarried Sisters Bail Proceedings Cannot Be Converted Into Recovery Proceedings; Court Can't Order Sale Of Accused's Property: Supreme Court Able-Bodied Husband Cannot Defeat Maintenance Claim By Projecting Income Below Minimum Wages: Delhi High Court Recording Section 313 CrPC Statement Before Cross-Examination Of Prosecution Witness Does Not Vitiate Trial: Karnataka High Court Murder By Unknown Assailants Is Not 'Accidental Death' Under Mukhymantri Kisan Bima Yojna: Allahabad High Court Section 311 CrPC | Court Not A Passive Bystander, Must Summon Material Witness If Essential For Just Decision: Rajasthan High Court

Courts Can Exercise Jurisdiction for Transit Anticipatory Bail Outside Territorial Jurisdiction: Punjab and Haryana High Court in Cyber Fraud Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has granted transit anticipatory bail to Sanesh Kumar, the petitioner in a cyber fraud case registered in Hyderabad. Justice Jasjit Singh Bedi, while delivering the judgment in CRM-M-901 of 2024, stated, "the Court of Sessions or the High Court, as the case may be, can exercise jurisdiction and entertain a plea for limited anticipatory bail/transit bail by way of interim protection for a limited duration even if the FIR has not been filed within its territorial jurisdiction."

The Court dealt with the issue of transit anticipatory bail in a case involving cybercrime. The FIR, filed at the Cyber Crime Police Station in Hyderabad, alleged offenses under Sections 66(C), 66(D) of the IT Act, and 419, 420 of the IPC.

Sanesh Kumar, the petitioner, sought transit anticipatory bail for 15 days to join the investigation in Hyderabad and to approach the competent court there for anticipatory bail. The FIR accused him of involvement in a cyber fraud case, duping the complainant of around Rs. 17,73,688 through a Telegram-based scam.

 

Jurisdiction for Transit Anticipatory Bail: Citing the precedent in "Priya Indoria Versus State of Karnataka & others," the Court observed that jurisdictional constraints should not impede access to justice. It underscored the principle that an accused is presumed innocent until proven guilty.

Analysis of Cyber Crime Investigation: The Court acknowledged the complexities in jurisdiction for cybercrime cases. It emphasized the necessity for courts to be flexible in handling cases spanning multiple jurisdictions.

Order for Transit Bail: Concluding the judgment, Justice Bedi granted transit anticipatory bail to the petitioner for 15 days, directing him to approach the competent court in Hyderabad. It was clarified that this order should not be construed as an opinion on the merits of the case.

Decision: The Court granted transit anticipatory bail to Sanesh Kumar, allowing him to approach the competent court in Hyderabad for further relief.

Date of Decided: 15.03.2024

Sanesh Kumar Vs. State of Haryana & Others

Latest Legal News