$~1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 09.02.2026 + BAIL APPLN. 49/2026 ROHIT GAGERNA .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Utkarsh Kumar, Advocate. versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent Through: Mr. Amit Ahlawat, APP for State with Inspector Ashish Dubey, Inspector Anand Prakash and SI Ranvijay Singh, PS Cyber Central. CORAM: JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA J U D G M E N T (ORAL) 1. The applicant/accused seeks regular bail in case FIR No. 11/2025 of Police Station Cyber Central for the offence under Section 318(4)/3(5) BNS 2023. 2. Broadly speaking, the allegation against the accused/applicant is as follows. On the complaint lodged by one Manish Tandon regarding a financial fraud of Rs. 23,75,437/- in the name of investment in stock market through fake trading application, the FIR was registered. In the course of investigation, 58 fraudulent transactions amounting to the total tune of Rs. 23,75,437/- were discovered. The trail of money led the investigators to find influx of Rs. 12,100/- in the HDFC Bank Account maintained by M/s Storeroom Solution Pvt. Ltd., which is the company registered in the names of Nitin Gagerna (brother of the accused/applicant) and Chetan Rana (friend of the accused/applicant). From that account the amount was transferred to CSB Account in the name of M/s RG Enterprises, which is a proprietorship concern of the accused/applicant. Further scrutiny of the bank accounts revealed multiple inter-account transactions between the said two business entities. Apart from that, the investigation also revealed several high value inter-account transactions between the proprietorship concern of the accused/applicant and a number of first layer bank accounts namely M/s Hi-Tech Trader, M/s Ankit Enterprises, M/s Gupta Enterprises, M/s Madhav Enterprises and M/s Yadav Karyana Store, all of which are linked to the present FIR. The total financial movement recorded by way of investigation came out to be to the tune of Rs. 43.33 Crores approximately across a period of six months, indicating large-scale circular fund movement suggestive of concealment, layering and laundering of the proceeds of crime. In the course of investigation, the accused/applicant was arrested and interrogated. 3. In the above backdrop, learned counsel for accused/applicant contends that he is innocent and is languishing in jail for past four months merely on account of an inflow of Rs. 12,100/- into his bank account. It is also contended that trial is yet to commence and the same shall take time to conclude. 4. Learned APP assisted by IO/SI Ranvijay Singh strongly opposes the bail application, contending that the laundered amount is not just Rs.12,100/-, but Rs. 43.33 Crores which amount was the transacted amount across a period of just six months and there is nothing found in the investigation to show that the same were genuine business transactions. Learned APP further discloses that apart from the present case, there are eight more cyber complaints of similar nature against the accused/applicant, and approximately Rs. 3.65 Crores from different first layer beneficiaries was received in the bank account of the proprietorship concern of the accused/applicant. It is also submitted that chargesheet in the present case stands filed but investigation in the other cases is ongoing. 5. Learned counsel for accused/applicant submits that the remaining eight cases do not pertain to the police station of the present investigator and they do not have current status of the same, and that in those cases, the investigators have already written to the bank that they do not need the said bank account for further investigation, so the account can be operated. It is further stated that even in present case the IO has stated that they have no objection if the accused/applicant is allowed to operate the bank account. 6. Merely because the investigating authorities have no objection to operation of the bank account, role of the accused/applicant in this kind of offence does not get diluted. It is not a case of simple cheating in the course of transactions. It is an intricate mesh of laundering of money not just vertically but horizontally as well, which is under investigation. As mentioned above, the accused/applicant is the real brother of the co-accused in one of the companies, from which the unexplained money came into the account of the accused/applicant. Such vast expansive frauds hit economy of the country severely. 7. Nothing has been produced before the investigator or before this Court by the accused/applicant to show authenticity of the transaction of Rs. 43.33 Crores in the bank account of the proprietorship concern of the accused/applicant within a short span of six months and about the inward movement of money from different business entities named above. In the status report filed before the Court of Sessions, it was specifically stated by the IO that neither the GST records nor purchase/sale invoices nor the income tax records were produced by the accused/applicant in the course of his interrogation. 8. Further, according to the prosecution, investigation being ongoing, release of the accused/applicant would hamper further investigation, which is of complex nature. 9. Considering the above factors, I do not find it a fit stage to release the accused/applicant on bail. Therefore, the bail application is dismissed. 10. Copy of this order be send to the concerned Jail Superintendent for being conveyed to the accused/applicant. GIRISH KATHPALIA (JUDGE) FEBRUARY 09, 2026/dr BAIL APPLN. 49/2026 Page 1 of 5 pages