J&K High Court rejects bail in Rs 53 Crore Cyber fraud case

Srinagar, July 21: The High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh at Srinagar, presided over by Justice Sanjay Dhar, has rejected bail applications for four individuals implicated in a Rs 53 crore financial fraud case.As per the judgement, a copy of which is with Rising Kashmir, the accused—Shahnawaz Ahmad Shah, Rumaisa Jan, Aamir Bashir Magray, and Ghulam Nabi Shah—are alleged to have orchestrated a cyber fraud scheme through an unregistered online trading platform, deceiving numerous victims with promises of high investment returns.“The case originated from a complaint filed by Firdous Ahmad Dar at Police Station Kangan, alleging that Shahnawaz Ahmad Shah, a Probationary Officer at J&K Bank, Kangan, induced him to transfer ₹5 lakh into a fraudulent scheme. Dar provided his Aadhaar, PAN, and bank account details, which Shah allegedly used for suspicious transactions, resulting in a lien on Dar’s account. The Investigating Agency uncovered transactions totalling approximately Rs 53 crores across the accused’s accounts at J&K Bank, SBI, HDFC, PNB, and IndusInd Bank, with credited amounts of Rs 4.15 crore to Shah, Rs 22.31 crore to Jan, Rs 26.43 crore to Magray and Rs 24.10 crore to Ghulam Nabi Shah,” the copy of the judgement reads.It states that the Government Advocate Waseem Gul, representing the Union Territory and Police Station Kangan, opposed the bail, arguing that the accused were involved in a large-scale financial scam affecting thousands. “Gul highlighted that the accused operated a fake online trading platform, @RSN, which lacked government registration or approval. The prosecution’s evidence includes statements from 13 witnesses confirming they were duped, along with significant inter-account transactions among the accused, suggesting a coordinated conspiracy,” the judgement reads. “The court found prima facie evidence of criminal breach of trust under Section 316(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) against Shahnawaz Ahmad Shah, who allegedly misused his banking position. The other accused were implicated through their financial dealings, supporting charges under Section 61 BNS (criminal conspiracy).”The judgement further stated that represented by advocates Salih Pirzada, Aamir Hamid, Areeb Kawoosa, and Gagan Oswal, the accused sought bail, claiming eligibility for default bail due to over 60 days in custody, medical issues for Shah and Rumaisa Jan, and the inapplicability of certain charges. Justice Dhar rejected these arguments, noting that Section 316(5) BNS, punishable by life imprisonment, allows detention up to 90 days before default bail applies. As the accused had been in custody for approximately 75 days, this threshold was not met. Medical claims were also dismissed, with Shah’s 2006 osteosarcoma diagnosis showing no recent deterioration and Jan’s condition deemed non-serious. “Citing Supreme Court precedent in P. Chidambaram v. Directorate of Enforcement (2020), the court underscored the gravity of economic offences, emphasising that the ongoing investigation—still tracing the funds’ origin and identifying associates, including Shah’s brother, Owais Ahmad Shah, studying in Bangladesh—justified denying bail. The Income Tax Department has been notified, and potential charges under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act are under consideration,” the judgment reads.  “The case, linked to FIR No. 28/2025 at Police Station Kangan and FIR No. 5/2025 at Cyber Police Station, Srinagar, continues to be investigated. The court’s ruling reflects the seriousness of the alleged fraud and the need to protect the integrity of the ongoing probe.”