Saddam Ansari K.T. v. State Represented By
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 08.07.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR Saddam Ansari @ Saddam Ansari K.T ... Petitioner/ Accused Vs.
State rep. by The Inspector of Police, Cyber Crime Police Station, Puducherry.
Crime No.24 of 2025 ... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the Petitioner/Accused on bail in Crime No.24 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police seeks bail. For Petitioner :
Mr.A.Thirumaran For Respondent :
Mr.K.S.Mohandass Public Prosecutor ( Puducherry)
O R D E R
The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 28.05.2025 in Crime No.24 of 2025 for the offence under Sections 67 of the Information Technology Act and Section 318(4) of BNS on the file of the respondent police seeks bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant got 1/5
acquainted with an instant loan application and had downloaded the said application and installed the same and upon such installation, the said application was able to accesses his mobile phone contacts and the defacto complainant had taken a loan of Rs.20,000/- using the said application and had settled the same along with interest and even after the settlement of the dues, it is alleged that one person contacted him through whatsapp and threatened him for money and thereafter, defacto complainant paid the money through his Bank and again, a sum of Rs.63,089/- was demanded and on refusal, the accused threatened that he will upload his morphed photographs in the social media. Hence, the case.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that, petitioner's name is not found in the FIR and the petitioner has no transaction with the defacto complainant and he is not connected with the loan application and he is neither the owner nor an employee and therefore, petitioner threatening the defacto complainant would not arise. In this case, notice under Section 35 of BNSS was issued. He further submitted that, petitioner using the Whatsapp had demanded money and also threatened the defacto complainant that he would upload the morphed photographs of the defacto complainant is only the imagination of the respondent. Further, in the FIR, 7 account details have been 2/5
given and none of the accounts belong to the petitioner. He further submitted that based on the confession of Azimudheen of Triplicane, petitioner has been arrested, now the said Azimudheen was set free. Hence, he prayed for grant of bail to the petitioner.
4. The learned Public Prosecutor ( Puducherry) submitted that, in this case, petitioner is a kingpin, who was having whatsapp group and had collected details of the loanists including the photographs and other details and thereafter, he had used the bank details in order to layer the account to foreign destinations to other persons. He further submitted that, several moneys have been transacted to the petitioner's account and in this case, more than Rs.1.5 Crores have been transacted. He also submitted that, now the ED has taken up the investigation and the investigation is at budding stage and hence, he strongly opposed for bail. He also submit that, as per the National Cyber Crime Portal, seven more complaints have been filed against the petitioner.
3/5
5. Considering the gravity of the offence committed by the petitioner and the magnitude of the money involved in this case and the investigation is at preliminary stage, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage.
6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 08.07.2025 sma M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J.
4/5
sma To 1.The Inspector of Police, Cyber Crime Police Station, Puducherry.
2. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.
08.07.2025 5/5