Bombay HC Refuses Bail to Man Accused of Trafficking Indians Abroad for Online Fraud Syndicate

The Bombay High Court has refused to grant bail to a man accused of trafficking unemployed Indian youths to Southeast Asian countries under the guise of overseas employment and forcing them to participate in online cryptocurrency scams.

The Court observed that the material on record disclosed a prima facie case that the accused and his associates had formed a criminal syndicate to lure victims abroad and compel them to carry out fraudulent online operations for unlawful financial gain.

A Division Bench of Justice A.S. Gadkari and Justice Shyam C. Chandak dismissed the criminal appeal filed by the accused challenging the rejection of his bail plea by the Special Court under the National Investigation Agency (NIA) Act.

The Bench held that the allegations disclosed serious offences, including human trafficking punishable under Section 371 of the Indian Penal Code, and that there existed a prima facie case indicating that the accused had participated in a conspiracy to traffic Indian youths abroad and force them into illegal online fraud activities.

The Court observed that the gravity of the offences and the likelihood of the accused absconding or tampering with evidence weighed against the grant of bail.

According to the prosecution, between December, 2022 and March, 2023 the accused and his associates allegedly trafficked several individuals to foreign countries on the pretext of providing lucrative employment opportunities.

The victims were reportedly promised well-paying jobs abroad but, upon arrival, were compelled to participate in fraudulent online activities designed to cheat individuals in other countries.

The case originated from a complaint lodged by Siddharth Yadav, a 23 year old hotel management graduate from Thane.

Siddharth had been searching for employment when he was introduced to agents who offered him a job opportunity abroad.

He was allegedly informed that he would be employed at a call centre in Thailand explaining cryptocurrency-related services to customers.

Acting on the offer, the complainant agreed to travel abroad and paid a processing fee for the job.

He subsequently received an employment offer, travel tickets and itinerary arranged through the accused and his associates.

In December 2022, he travelled from Mumbai to Thailand and was then taken to the Golden Triangle Special Economic Zone in Laos.

The prosecution alleged that after reaching the destination, the complainant and other individuals were forced to engage in fraudulent online operations instead of the promised employment.

They were reportedly instructed to create fake profiles on social media platforms such as Facebook, Instagram and TikTok in order to establish contact with individuals from other countries.

Once communication was established, the victims were allegedly directed to persuade these individuals to download mobile applications related to cryptocurrency investment schemes. According to the investigation, victims were instructed to build trust with potential targets and convince them to invest money through the applications.

The Court noted that once funds were deposited into the applications by unsuspecting users, the system would display fictitious profit figures within the application interface, giving the impression of successful investment returns.

In reality, no such profits existed and the funds were ultimately transferred to accounts controlled by the accused persons and their associates.

The investigation further revealed that when the trafficked individuals expressed unwillingness to participate in the fraudulent activities, they were subjected to coercion and intimidation. The accused persons allegedly withheld their travel documents, threatened them with harm and imposed monetary penalties in order to compel them to continue working.

In some instances, the victims reportedly attempted to seek assistance from the Indian Embassy.

The complainant and others allegedly contacted the embassy via email requesting rescue from the situation.

The prosecution stated that when the accused became aware of these communications, the victims were forced to surrender their mobile phones, delete data and withdraw their complaints.

The complainant also alleged that he was assaulted, abused and forced to pay money as a condition for facilitating his repatriation to India. Eventually, local authorities in Laos intervened after receiving the distress communication and the victims were rescued and repatriated to India.

Following his return, the complainant lodged a complaint with the Vile Parle Police Station in Mumbai in March 2024, leading to the registration of offences including cheating, human trafficking, extortion, criminal conspiracy and offences under the Emigration Act. The accused was arrested shortly thereafter.

During the course of the investigation, the case was subsequently taken over by specialised investigating authorities, and charge sheets were filed against the accused and his associates.

Before the High Court, counsel for the appellant argued that the alleged victims had voluntarily accepted employment abroad after being informed about the nature of the work. It was also contended that the accused himself had travelled abroad under an employment arrangement and could not therefore be treated as a trafficker. The defence further argued that the prosecution had failed to produce evidence of cheating or trafficking and that the accused had already spent a considerable period in custody.

Opposing the plea, the prosecution argued that witness statements, electronic records and other evidence indicated that the accused had deliberately deceived job seekers and transported them abroad where they were compelled to participate in fraudulent schemes.

The Bench further observed that the victims were made to operate fake online identities and participate in schemes designed to defraud individuals by promising cryptocurrency investment profits. The Court noted that such activities formed part of an organised fraudulent operation conducted for unlawful gain.

Taking into account the seriousness of the allegations, including offences punishable with life imprisonment, the Court concluded that the case did not warrant the exercise of discretion in favour of granting bail.

Case Title: Jerry Philips Jacob v. National Investigation Agency & Anr.

Bench: Justice A.S. Gadkari and Justice Shyam C. Chandak

Date of Judgment: 10.03.2026