<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2021 (6) TMI 1175 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457315</link>
    <description>Anticipatory bail was declined in a large-scale cyber fraud case involving VOIP calls, remote access software, e-gift cards, crypto-currency wallets and Zelle accounts. The court found prima facie material from WhatsApp chats and recoveries linking the petitioner to the operation and treated the investigation as still at a preliminary stage. Custodial interrogation was held necessary to trace the source of victim data, the money trail and the full conspiracy, and the principles applicable to arrests in offences punishable up to seven years were held not to create a blanket bar. The petitioner&#039;s employment and medical material were found insufficient to justify pre-arrest protection.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 04 Jun 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 16 Sep 2024 20:01:10 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=768422" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (6) TMI 1175 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457315</link>
      <description>Anticipatory bail was declined in a large-scale cyber fraud case involving VOIP calls, remote access software, e-gift cards, crypto-currency wallets and Zelle accounts. The court found prima facie material from WhatsApp chats and recoveries linking the petitioner to the operation and treated the investigation as still at a preliminary stage. Custodial interrogation was held necessary to trace the source of victim data, the money trail and the full conspiracy, and the principles applicable to arrests in offences punishable up to seven years were held not to create a blanket bar. The petitioner&#039;s employment and medical material were found insufficient to justify pre-arrest protection.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 04 Jun 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457315</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>