Bengaluru: CID detects over 42,000 mule bank accounts; 13 arrested
Bengaluru: In a major statewide operation against cybercrime, the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) has detected more than 42,000 mule bank accounts used by cyber fraudsters and arrested 13 accused in Bengaluru, The New Indian Express reported on Saturday.
The operation was carried out by Cyber Crime Police attached to the CID. All 29 Cyber, Economic and Narcotics (CEN) police stations across Karnataka were directed to collect details of suspicious bank accounts linked to online fraud.
ALSO READ: Siddaramaiah will be CM until Cong high command decides otherwise: Parameshwara
Police said fraudsters paid Rs 10,000 to Rs 20,000 to actual account holders to use their accounts to collect money. Simultaneous raids were conducted at over 100 locations in Bengaluru, Mysuru, Davanagere, Mangaluru and Belagavi.
“The actual account holders were reportedly unaware of any transactions made in their accounts. Most of them are daily wage labourers. Whenever details of bank accounts were found out in any cyber frauds, they led us to actual account holders. Only when they were questioned, would they know that their bank accounts were used for wrong purposes,” an officer said.
During the raids, police seized laptops, mobile phones, debit cards, ATM cards and SIM cards used in the fraud operations.
Police have warned the public not to share bank account details, ATM cards or passwords with anyone. “Allowing others to use your bank account for commission is a serious criminal offence. This operation is the result of several months of intelligence gathering,” the officer said.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Court can reject anticipatory bail but cannot direct accused to surrender: SC
New Delhi (PTI): A court can reject anticipatory bail of an accused but it has no jurisdiction to direct him to surrender before the trial court, the Supreme Court has said.
A bench of Justices J B Pardiwala and Ujjal Bhuyan made the observation while hearing a plea filed by a man accused of cheating and forgery.
"If the court wants to reject the anticipatory bail, it may do so, but the court has no jurisdiction to say that the petitioner should now surrender," the bench said.
The Jharkhand High Court had rejected anticipatory bail plea of the accused and asked him to surrender and seek regular bail.
In this case, a complaint had been filed before a magistrate alleging offences under Sections 323 (voluntarily causing hurt), 420 (cheating), 467 (forgery of valuable security), 468 (forgery for purpose of cheating), 471 (using forged document) and 120B read with 34 of the IPC, in connection with a land dispute.
The high court had dismissed the second anticipatory bail application of the accused on the ground that no new circumstances were shown.
It had relied on its earlier order rejecting his first anticipatory bail plea, in which the court directed the petitioner to surrender before the trial court and seek regular bail in terms of the decision in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI.
The top court said such a direction was wholly without jurisdiction and said that if a court chooses to reject anticipatory bail, it may do so, but it cannot compel the accused to surrender.
