HC denies anticipatory bail to juvenile in Rs 80-lakh cyber blackmail case

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has refused anticipatory bail to a juvenile allegedly involved in an elaborate Rs 80 lakh cyber blackmail scheme targeting a 15-year-old schoolgirl managing her illiterate grandmother’s land compensation account. Justice Namit Kumar acknowledged the petitioner’s juvenile status but cautioned that granting protection in such cases would only embolden the rising menace of cybercrimes aimed at the most vulnerable—teenagers and youth.

Justice Kumar noted that the accused was a child in conflict with law and a classmate of the victim, but added that her juvenile status did not appeal to the court in view of the grave and serious nature of her conduct.

“This court is having ample and cautious notice of the fact that the petitioner is a juvenile/child-in-conflict with law and is a classmate of the minor victim. But her involvement in such a heinous crime not only resulted in extortion of lakhs of rupees from a 15-year-old school-going minor girl/victim, but even her sexual harassment by the co-accused for being blackmailed with her morphed /obscene photographs. So in this view of the matter, the fact of petitioner being child-in-conflict/juvenile could not appeal this court in actuality,” Justice Kumar asserted.

The juvenile-accused was seeking anticipatory bail in the case registered under the provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and the POCSO Act at Sector 10 police station in Gurugram. The Bench was told that the minor-victim was targeted and repeatedly blackmailed. The threats led to the forced transfer of over Rs 80 lakh between February and December 2024 from the bank account of her grandmother—an elderly, illiterate woman who had received approximately Rs 2 crore as compensation for land acquisition. The bank account was being operated by the victim.

Referring to the petitioner’s role, the Bench asserted it was “crystal clear” that she actively blackmailed the victim and extorted substantial sums by threatening to circulate her obscene visuals. There were WhatsApp and Snapchat conversations, where the petitioner threatened and demanded money by blackmailing the victim with private contents.

“In case such kinds of wrong doers, as like the petitioner, are granted protection of any kind in this increasing menace and rising threat of cyber crimes, it will give wrong impact on the society at large, especially on the teenagers and youth, being most vulnerable lot in such online traps and frauds,” Justice Kumar asserted.

Pointing at the status report submitted by the State, the court observed that the petitioner’s custodial interrogation was necessary for recovering the extorted money, seizing the mobile phone containing the explicit content, and examining the modus operandi behind the crime.

Justice Kumar added “the petitioner prima facie cannot be considered innocent… since there is sufficient and ample documentary evidence against the petitioner showing her involvement.” The Bench further observed that the minor victim, in her statement recorded under Section 183 of BNSS, specifically named the petitioner and described how she was blackmailed and coerced.

“The seriousness of offence committed by the petitioner and coercion exercised by her along with other accused… this Court is of the considered opinion that in case the petitioner is granted concession of anticipatory bail, there will always remain possibility of tampering with the evidence and influencing the witnesses,” Justice Kumar held.

Chandigarh