Primary sources · Judgment
MOHD NAZIM KHAN Vs THE STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI
- Delhi High Court adapter: text extracted by Firecrawl; the source PDF was not retrieved, so no original file is archived.
$~66
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Decision: 20.08.2026
CNR No. DLHC010389192026
BAIL APPLN. 3443/2026 & CRL.M.A. 25651/2026
MOHD NAZIM KHAN .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Ajay Sharma, Ms. Nikita Rana,
Ms. Gurpreet Kaur and Mr. Aakash
Passi, Advocates.
versus
THE STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent
Through: Mr. Amit Ahlawat, APP for the State
with SI Sumit.
CORAM: JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA
J U D G M E N T (ORAL)
The accused/applicant seeks regular bail in case e-FIR No. 88/2026 of
PS Special Cell for offence under Section 318(4)/319(2)/61(2)/3(5)/112(2)
of BNS, Section 66D of Information Technology Act, Section 42 of
Telecommunication Act and Section 4/20/25 of Indian Telegraph Act.
I have heard learned counsel for accused/applicant and learned APP
for the State assisted by Investigating Officer/SI Sumit.
Broadly speaking, the allegation against the accused/applicant is that
BAIL APPLN. 3443/2026
Page 1 of 4 pages he provided and facilitated the illegal SIM Boxes and GSM Gateway
devices for routing international VoIP calls into the Indian Telecom
Network for helping the cyber fraudsters to carry out various cyber frauds,
including digital arrests.
Learned counsel for accused/applicant submits that accused/applicant
was arrested on 13.04.2026 and chargesheet was filed on 04.06.2026. It is
submitted that since the entire evidence is electronic, there is no need to
further detain the accused/applicant in custody. It is submitted by learned
counsel that nothing incriminating was recovered from the accused/applicant
and he never visited Delhi.
Learned APP strongly opposes the bail application, submitting that as
per investigation carried out, the accused/applicant is the key handler and
operator, who facilitated installation and remote operation of the SIM Box
through AnyDesk application. It is further submitted that according to the
investigation carried out, the accused/applicant issued instructions to coaccused Anil Kumar and Vaibhav Raj, after supplying them SIM Cards
through courier. It is further submitted by learned APP that according to the
investigation record, the accused/applicant called the co-accused to Delhi
and offered them to work for foreign-based operators after providing SIM
Boxes, laptop and remotely controlled setups. Further, as per investigation,
as many as 44 SIM Cards were recovered from his premises. Learned APP
has also apprised that the accused/applicant was earlier also involved in a
BAIL APPLN. 3443/2026 similar offence pertaining to SIM Box, which was registered as FIR No.
4/2019 of PS ATS Mumbai. Since the accused/applicant, according to the
investigation, has links with foreign-based handlers, it would not be proper
to grant him bail as per learned Prosecutor. It is also submitted that during
investigation, four SIM covers were recovered, all bearing the mobile phone
number of the accused/applicant.
The nature of the offence, that too, a repeated offence is a vital factor
to be kept in mind in the present case.
Going by the above described nature and expanse of the offence
alleged against the accused/applicant, merely because the evidence to be
adduced is electronic, the accused/applicant cannot rightfully claim grant of
bail. Merely because the evidence is electronic, it cannot be said that the
accused/applicant cannot tamper with the same. Looking into the technical
profile of the accused/applicant, it is not impossible for him to tamper with
the electronic evidence with the help of any remote software similar to
AnyDesk as allegedly used by the accused/applicant.
I also find substance in the apprehension of the prosecution that in
view of the connections between the accused/applicant and foreign-based
handlers, as revealed during investigation, it cannot be said that he is not a
flight risk.
BAIL APPLN. 3443/2026
Page 3 of 4 pages
Further, the Court also cannot ignore the impact of such crimes on
society at large and specifically, economy of the country, already facing
multiple cyber frauds, which are facilitated by such activities as are alleged
against the accused/applicant.
Considering the above circumstances, I do not find it a fit case to
grant bail. So the bail application and accompanying application are
dismissed. Copy of this order be sent to the concerned Jail Superintendent
for being informed to the accused/applicant.
GIRISH
KATHPALIA
Digitally signed by GIRISH KATHPALIA
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,
2.5.4.20=8401 1d889b7a27b7a26f55ffe4afec45569
a3f962c2fb48354d1597626cacca, ou=HIGH
COURT OF DELHI,CID = 7047638,
postCode=110003, st=Delhi,
serialNumber=ae386796451e4c507b5d155709
9e64d8cb2be2e6042e42874896fb81e26fa,
cm=GIRISH KATHPALIA
Date: 2026.08.20 18:04:04 +0530'
**AUGUST 20, 2026/**rs
GIRISH KATHPALIA
(JUDGE)
BAIL APPLN. 3443/2026
Page 4 of 4 pages