Calcutta High Court Refuses To Quash Alleged ₹85 Lakh Bitcoin Fraud Case; Allows Further Investigation By Police

The Calcutta High Court has dismissed a petition seeking quashing of criminal proceedings in a cyber fraud case involving alleged inducement to invest in bitcoin trading, holding that an order directing further investigation after submission of a final report does not suffer from illegality and that proceedings cannot be quashed at a premature stage based on mere apprehension. Justice Chaitali Chatterjee Das passed the order while rejecting a plea filed under Section 482 CrPC (now Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023).The case arose from a complaint alleging that unknown persons conspired to induce the de facto complainant to invest ₹85.80 lakhs in bitcoin trading through a platform named “Yotemo Currency Services Company”, promising high returns. The complainant alleged that despite making substantial online transfers between April and June 2024, he was denied full withdrawal of his funds and was further asked to pay additional amounts towards verification fees and taxes, which he refused, resulting in total loss of the invested amount.The petitioner approached the High Court contending that he was not named in the FIR and had no role in the alleged offence. He claimed that he came to know about the case only after his bank account was frozen and apprehended that he might be unjustly implicated. It was argued that the proceedings were mala fide and vexatious, and that the investigating agency had earlier submitted a Final Report True (FRT) citing lack of evidence.The petitioner further challenged the order of the Magistrate permitting further investigation, contending that the same was allowed before the court had passed any order accepting or rejecting the final report and even before the de facto complainant appeared pursuant to notice. Reliance was placed on Supreme Court judgments to argue that such power must be exercised strictly in accordance with law and only upon discovery of fresh material.Opposing the plea, the State submitted that further investigation was ordered upon instructions from superior officers after detection of complex fund trails involving multiple banks. It was contended that several mobile numbers were found to be registered in the petitioner's name, notices issued to him went unanswered, and his conduct indicated evasion of investigation. The prosecution argued that further probe was necessary to trace the flow of misappropriated funds and identify the actual perpetrators.The High Court examined the law relating to further investigation under Section 173(8) CrPC and relied upon multiple Supreme Court decisions, including State through CBI v. Hemendra Reddy, Vinubhai Haribhai Malviya v. State of Gujarat and Rama Chaudhary v. State of Bihar. The Court reiterated that further investigation is only supplemental in nature and that a Magistrate has wide powers to order further investigation at any stage before commencement of trial, provided the matter is pending before the court.Applying the settled principles, the Court held that the Magistrate had acted within jurisdiction in permitting further investigation even after submission of the final report, as the matter was still pending and cognisance had not culminated in trial. The Court found no illegality or procedural irregularity in the impugned order.The Court also noted that the petitioner was not a named accused in the FIR and had approached the Court merely on the basis of apprehension of possible implication. It held that criminal proceedings involving allegations of fraud to the tune of more than ₹80 lakhs could not be quashed on the basis of such apprehension, particularly when investigation by the Anti-Fraud section was still ongoing.Accordingly, holding that no ground for exercise of inherent jurisdiction was made out, the High Court dismissed the criminal revisional application and declined to interfere with the ongoing investigation, without any order as to costs.Case: ARUP MONDAL VS THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ANR. Case No: CRR 493 OF 2025Click here to read order

Calcutta High Court Refuses To Quash Alleged ₹85 Lakh Bitcoin Fraud Case; Allows Further Investigation By Police

Srinjoy Das

Tags