Delhi High Court Slams Cop Over 'Sham Paperwork' In Cyber-fraud Probe, Grants Bail To Man After 10 Months In Jail

The Delhi High Court has pulled up the Delhi Police's investigating officer for conducting a cyber-fraud investigation through what it termed “sham paperwork”, while granting bail to a 27-year-old man who had remained in custody for nearly 10 months.

Justice Girish Kathpalia observed that the updated status report reflected that the investigation had remained at a standstill and conveyed an impression that it was not being conducted with sincerity despite earlier observations by the Court.

The Court was hearing a bail plea filed by Vishal Sharma, an accused in a Cyber FIR under Sections 318(4), 61(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.

As per prosecution, the complainant had met a woman identifying herself as Isha Rajput through Bumble. After they moved their conversations to WhatsApp, she allegedly induced him to invest through the Centurymarket Trading App.

The complainant invested Rs. 25,000, which allegedly showed profits taking the amount to Rs. 1.90 lakh. When he sought to withdraw the money, he was allegedly asked to deposit another Rs. 2,65,965 after being told his account had been frozen. He subsequently lodged a cybercrime complaint.

The Prosecution alleged that Rs. 1.40 lakh of the cheated amount was received in Sharma's bank account.

The accused claimed that the transaction was part of a genuine business deal which had failed. According to his counsel, the bank account into which the money was transferred had been opened on the advice of Abhishek, with whom Sharma was entering into a business deal.

The Delhi Police however opposed bail, citing the ongoing investigation and Sharma's alleged involvement in another cyber-fraud case in Jaipur.

Granting bail to him, the Court noted that neither Abhishek nor Isha Rajput, both described as co-accused by the prosecution, had been arrested.

The Court noted that the concerned IO had issued a notice to Abhishek in December 2025 to join the investigation but took no further action. In Isha's case, it noted that Bumble had not responded to a police notice seeking her particulars.

"The updated status report, as mentioned above reflects nothing but sham paperwork carried out by the IO to somehow justify the prolonged incarceration of the present accused/applicant. No serious effort appears to have been made to arrest the co-accused Abhishek and no serious effort appears to have been made to even trace out the co-accused Isha Rajput. From material on record as on date, it cannot be ruled out that Isha Rajput is a fictitious name," the Court said.

Despite 10 months having passed, “practically nothing concrete” had been done by the IO in this regard, the Court said, holding that keeping Sharma in jail was therefore not justified.

The Court further noted that Bumble managers had not responded to multiple notices, but the IO took no further action against them to trace Isha.

Further, it said that even after 10 months of investigation, the IO had not obtained screenshots of conversations or call logs between the complainant and Isha.

As regards Abhishek, non-bailable warrants issued against him were later recalled. He subsequently failed to join the investigation pursuant to another notice issued by the IO, but the Court said that no further action was taken against him.

The Court said it found substance in the defence's submission that the IO was carrying out “only paperwork in the name of investigation and taking no serious steps.”

As such, the bail plea was allowed on a personal bond of Rs. 50,000, with one surety in the like amount.

Appearance: Mr. Ojas Nirula, Mr. Piyush Jain and Mr. Paritosh Yadav, Advocates for Petitioner; Mr. Amit Ahlawat, APP for State with IO/SI Ankur.