The High Court · 2025

The State of Telangana, Rep by its Public Prosecutor High Court.Hyderabad Through S H O, P.S Cyber Crime, at Cyberabad (town and tvlandal) Rangreddy dtstrict and T.S. ...Petitioner/Accused ...RespondenUCom Plainant Petition under Section 482 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Nilemorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in Crime (FlR) No.2336 of 2025. daled 2ologl2025, Cyber Crime SHO Hyderabad on such terms and conditions as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the rnterest of Justice. This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri M.A. Aleem tr/ajid, representing lril/s. Gix Law Firm And Legal Services, Advocate for the Petitioner and Sri D. Arun Kumar, Additional Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent. The Court made the following: ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TE], INGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SU.I INA CRIMI NAL PETITION No.15395 OF 2O'.l; OSth DAY OF DECEMBER 2025 Between : Abdul Naveed Khaliq Pe titioner/ A. 1 And The State of Telangana, Rep., by its Public Prosecutor, High Court at Ilyderabad, Through SHO P.S.Cyber Crime at Cyberabad (town t ; Mandal) Ranga Reddy Dist rict Respondent ORDER This criminai petition is filed under Ser: ion 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2O'.! by the petitioner/Accused seeking anticipatory bail in co I rection with FIR No.2336 of 2025 of Cyber Crimes Police Statiorr Cyberabad. The offences alleged againsl the petitioner are lrn lr:r Sections 308(4), 308(5), 318(2), 319(2), ss6(3), 338 zrn L 318(4) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita,2023, and under Sectir,r 3 (l) (1) of T.S.Gaming Act, Section 66 D of Information Techr r log.' Act. 2

2. The case of the prosecution is that the complainant lodged a complaint before police on 20.O9.2025 stating that he rvas a victim of a scrious financial fraud committed by the online gaming platform Dafabet, which he alleged was operating illegally in India through foreign servers while misusing Indian bank accounts and UPI gateways for transactions. He clari{red thal he had no role in running or promoting the platform. On lO .06.2025, he u,as instructed to deposit money through specific rvebsites and Dafabet made him to deposit amount using Indian payment systems like UPI and local bank transfers into accounts belonging to Indian customers, as directed by Dafabet representatives. Initially, his Dafabet account showed a "bonus balance," which gave hirn the impression that his money (vas safe. However, when he attempted to withdraw funds, customer support refused and insisted that he had to continue wagering. Despite expressing his desire to stop and retrieve his money, he was pressurized to deposit more under the pretext of meeting 'wagering requirements." Trusting their assurances, he continued depositing large sums over nearly three months, ullimately losing approximately Rs.75,00,000/- through Union Bank (A/c No.263412O 10001296) and Indian Bank (A/c No. 8108134593) and on O8.O9.2025, he was abruptly blocked from -3 accessing the Dafabet platform. Hence, he request: I the police to take necessary action lor the fraud commit rt I on him- Basing on the said complaint police registered tht: c lse against the accused for the said offences.

3. Heard Sri M.A. Aleem Majid, learned counscl I rpresenhng M/ s.Grx Law Firm and Legal Services appelrr I lq for the petitioner and Sri D.Arun Kumar, Iearned Adcli 'ln:rl Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-State' The contention of learned counsel for the pet t oner ls tha[ 4. petitioner is innocent of the alleged offences and rc is falsely implicated in this case. He never committed trrt offence as alleged in the impugned FIR. The incident allegeci -' have taken place in the rnonth of June 2O25 whereas complai I r'vas lodged on 20.O9.2C25 after lapse of long time Tr ) petitioner undertakes to cooperate with the investigation' l r there is no specific allegation against the petitioner, requested tiis Court to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. On the other hand, learned Additional Pubii : Prosecutor opposed bail stating that the petitioner herein plar t C key role in facilitating and organizing the online betting relatt t cyber fraud activities conducted through the Dafabet platform : 'rd he earlier I i 4 worked in Qatar and rnaintained contacts involved in online betting operations. lrveraging this experience, the petitioner coordinated with other accuscd and committed cyber fraud and he was also found to be administrator/ active member of a Whats App.group by name 'Hyderabad NEW'along with A.2, A.3 and A.5. The evidence recovered from the seized mobile devrces show's that within this Whats App group, A. I coordinated the procuremen[ and usage o[ bank accounts, issued instructions and monitored the movemcnt of fraudulent funds routed through the Dafabet platform. As such, his custodial interrogation is very much required to stop further fraud. Hence, prayed this Court to dismiss this petitron. ' Considering the submissions made and perusal of 9 material on record, the petitioner herein is arrayed as A. I . Though petitioner contends that he is innocent of the said allegations, the information submitted by learned Additional Public Prosecutor shows that petitioner is an administrator of a Whats App group named 'Hyderabad NtrW', he gave instructions for committing fraud. In view of the serious allegations against the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner and the same is liable to be dismissed. 5 I ! I i

7. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is dismissed Miscellaneor-rs petitions, if any, pending shall stan: r:losed. SD/- S.MIT .LIKARJUNA RAO ASSII] 'ANT REGISTRAR \ //TRUE COPY// .[ TION OFFICER To,

1. The Vl l\/etropolitan Sessions Judge, Kukatpally, Ranga I ;ddy z rne rx Additional Judicial Magistra]te of First class, Kuka! ally, cyberabad S f n. Strtion House Officer, Cyber Crimes Police Station ' a two CCs to Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State cf Telangana at 5 OrieCC to tWs Clx Law Firm And Legal Services' Advolr te IOPUC] 6. Two CD CoPies Hyderabad [OUT] ( yberabad ABK /PSL Y" ,.ar:' ,ri{nE s -I4 C) 2 7 JrN 2028 ,z c)\ t Qryr I ,;.o HIGH COURT DATED: 051'1212025 ORDER CRLP.No.15395 of 2025 DISMISSING THE CRIMINAL PETITION ,@(,- ^^a At^'