CRL.P/3059/2026 of BAYAMGARI SAHIK SAYOUF Vs STATE OF KARNATAKA on 7 April 2026

ORAL ORDER

The petitioner is the sole accused before this Court seeking regular bail in Crime No.02/2026 filed by the respondent/police for the offences punishable under Sections 66(D) & 66(C) of the Information Technology Act, 2008 and Section 318(4) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 pending on the file of the learned 37th Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bangalore.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 06.01.2026 Sushma H. A. lodged a complainant stating that she was added to WhatsApp group in November 2025, where the administrator introduced themselves as representatives of ICICI Bank/security and they claimed

HC-KAR

that they were onboarding selected clients for an advanced broker trading account offering minimum platform and brokerage fees, and further they also introduced a profit sharing scheme based on the block trade that would be executed through institutional channels resulting in high and consistent profits. Further, she has been assured that profit would be shared after completion of the trading cycle and withdrawal would be smooth and hassle-free. Believing their versions and thinking that the representations are genuine, an amount has been transferred from HDFC Bank, Canara Bank and Karnataka Bank accounts, including the bank of the complainant. Subsequently, the complainant came to know that she had been shown a fake loan amount of Rs. 7,00,000/- on the website, and she was informed that the said account was locked. Hence, they demanded that she has to pay the amount to unlock the account. As she came to know that she had been cheated by the petitioner and others, she lodged a complaint to the Cyber Crime Helpline

HC-KAR

and requested to take suitable action. After registering the case during investigation, the respondent/police have arrested the petitioner, accused No.4 and Sheikh Tahir, and they have been remanded to judicial custody. The investigation is under progress.

3. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner is innocent of the alleged offences and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He is a student studying in MCA and is not involved in the alleged inducement to invest the amount under the said scheme. However, he has been partially implicated in this case. Since the petitioner is a student, he may be enlarged on bail by imposing suitable conditions; he will abide by the said conditions to be imposed by this Court. Making such submission, he prays to allow the petition.

4. Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent/State vehemently submitted that the investigation is under progress. Specific and certain

HC-KAR

allegations have been made against the petitioner. The said allegations have to be investigated properly. In case the petitioner is enlarged on bail, there may be chances of absconding from the case, and also there may be chances of tampering with the proceedings of the Court. Hence, the petition may be rejected.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the averments of the complaint. It appears from the record that Sushma H. A. lodged the complaint stating that she is a resident of Bangalore. She is a registered Indian patent agent working as a patent coordinator in Bangalore. She has stated in her complaint that she is the primary victim of an online investment fraud. According to the said complaint, in the month of November 2025, she was added to the WhatsApp group, where the administrators introduced themselves as representatives of ICICI Securities, and they claimed that they were onboarding and they selected clients for an "advanced broker trading account" offering minimum

HC-KAR

platform and brokerage fees. According to her, she has invested some amount in the said platform. Subsequently, it is stated that the accused persons displayed a fake loan amount of Rs. 7,00,000/- on the website and stated that the account was locked. They demanded repayment of the said amount for account unlocking, trusting their assurances she had paid the amount of Rs. 7,00,000/-. However, even after making all payments, withdrawal of funds was not permitted. Thereafter, the accused persons claimed that loan repayment had been completed and they were demanding an additional payment of 10% of the so- called profits as a commission in the name of ICICI Securities. Hence, she has lodged a complaint against the petitioner and others.

6. On going through the averments of the complaint and also considering that the petitioner is aged about 21 years, and a permanent resident of Rayachoti, Kadapa District, Andhra Pradesh. He, being a student involved in the said scam, unnecessarily and he started

HC-KAR

cheating the innocent investors at a tender age. To regulate further cheating, it is appropriate to reject the bail. Hence, I proceed to pass the following:

ORDER

The petition stands rejected.

Sd/- (S RACHAIAH) JUDGE

BKM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 11