2 min readMumbaiMar 8, 2026 09:26 PM IST
OBSERVING THAT cyber fraud is “more serious” than robbery and dacoity, a magistrate court rejected bail to three persons booked in a cyber crime, involving Rs 3.74 crore in a 2025 case by CBI’s Economic Offences Branch in which six persons were accused of cheating various persons and firms.
“The alleged offence is regarding cheating and cyber fraud of an amount of Rs 3.74 crore. In a single day, there was cheating of nearly 10 victims… Admittedly, in this case, all offences are triable by this court, the chargesheet has been filed against the accused. However, as stated above, the offence is related to cyber fraud. It is more serious than robbery and dacoity. It needs to be viewed seriously while passing order on bail application,” additional chief judicial magistrate V R Patil said in the order passed on March 2.
The court rejected the pleas of a 19-year-old student, Yash Thakur, Sahil Jain and Haedar Sayyed, arrested in September-October 2025. The CBI alleges that in 11 separate incidents on a single day, July 2, 2025, the accused had cheated persons through cyber fraud involving false digital arrests, online financial fraud and customs fraud. The CBl had registered an FIR against one S P Cargo and Courier Services Pvt Ltd and its director Sudhir Palande and others claiming that private persons and firms were cheated and the amount was transferred on a single day to one mule account through 12 transactions.
Thakur in his bail plea had said that his name is not mentioned in the FIR, and he has nothing to do with the main accused. Jain had also claimed that he was neither a beneficiary, nor a facilitator in the fraud. Sayyed too said in his bail plea that he was not named in the FIR and has no role in any kind of inducement of the victims.
The CBI opposed the pleas, stating that each of the three had a specific role. The court said that as per the prosecution, the money from Indian victims is routed through foreign countries, with the use of crypto currency, making it an economic offence, which “has to be viewed with a different and stringent approach”.
