The Delhi High Court has denied anticipatory bail to Shamikh Shahbaz Shaikh, a Rapipay agent, accused of involvement in an online part-time job scam that defrauded a man of ₹17.95 lakh. The order was passed by Justice Ravinder Dudeja, who emphasized the serious nature of the allegations and the necessity of custodial interrogation to uncover the full extent of the fraud.
Details of the Scam and Investigation
The case originates from a complaint filed by Pradeep Kumar Behera at Cyber Police Station, Rohini, Delhi. He reported being lured into a fake part-time job via WhatsApp and Telegram, where he was asked to complete investment tasks. Over time, he transferred a total of ₹17,95,000 from multiple bank accounts. A part of this amount, ₹4,00,000, was later traced to the applicant’s Rapipay-linked account.
Read AlsoL:- Delhi High Court Orders Saket Gokhale to Issue Public Apology to Lakshmi Puri Over Defamatory Tweets
Investigation revealed a complex web of fund transfers—from Yes Bank (Sanofi Enterprises), to ICICI (S.S. Fashion), to Axis Bank (Rapipay Fintech Pvt. Ltd.), finally landing in the account of accused Feroz Ibrahim Shaikh. His IP logs were found connected to the applicant, Shamikh Shaikh. Further digital trails through IP logs and WhatsApp chats linked the accused with co-conspirators including his brothers-in-law, who played roles in collecting the defrauded money.
“The presence of a prima facie case, the applicant’s role in enabling the laundering of proceeds of crime, and the need to uncover the full extent of the conspiracy collectively weigh against the grant of anticipatory bail,”
Read Also:- Delhi High Court: Mere Suspicion of Affair Not Enough to Prove Abetment of Suicide in Dowry Death Case
Justice Dudeja noted that 29 separate complaints were registered against the virtual account operated by the applicant. The court also cited evidence such as IP log matches and fund flows between the applicant and co-accused. It concluded that the allegations were not only specific and serious but also part of an organized cyber fraud network.
The Court relied on the Supreme Court's ruling in SFIO v. Aditya Sarda, which states:
“Economic offences form a distinct category and must be treated with seriousness. Anticipatory bail should be granted sparingly in such cases, especially when the accused may be obstructing legal processes.”
The applicant had claimed he was being falsely implicated and had even filed a complaint against Rapipay Fintech Pvt. Ltd. for misusing his virtual account. However, the Investigating Officer reported that although the applicant joined the investigation, his cooperation was inadequate.
The defense cited multiple Supreme Court judgments—including Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar and Sanjay Chandra v. CBI—to argue that custodial interrogation was unnecessary and that the accused met all bail conditions like non-flight risk and no evidence tampering. But the Court found these references misplaced given the gravity and organized nature of the economic offence.
“The applicant’s plea of innocence and allegations of misuse of his account are issues that require deeper investigation and do not merit anticipatory bail at this stage.”
The Court concluded that the facts, supported by digital and financial trails, justified denying anticipatory bail. Justice Dudeja clarified that this opinion was only prima facie and would not influence any future decision if the applicant seeks regular bail.
Appearance: Mr. Aditya Wadhwa, Mr. Sougat Mishra, Mr. Rohit Shukla and Ms. Nitika Duhan, Advs. for Petitioner; Mr. Aman Usman, APP for the State.
Case title: Shamikh Shahbaz Shaikh v. State Govt. Of NCT Of Delhi
Case no.: BAIL APPLN. 731/2025
