New Delhi, Jul 23 A Delhi court has declined anticipatory bail to a man accused of impersonating his brother-in-law through fake emails sent to US federal agencies, saying the allegations pointed to a serious cyber crime with international ramifications and required custodial interrogation.
Additional Sessions Judge Hargurvarinder Singh Jaggi dismissed the plea of Michael Ashish Mukherjee, saying the allegations against him went beyond a matrimonial dispute and disclosed a "highly sophisticated" cyber crime.
Mukherjee was accused of sending fake e-mails to US agencies by impersonating his brother-in-law and falsely confessing to the assassination of American political activist Charlie Kirk.
An FIR was registered against Mukherjee at Safdarjung Enclave police station here under several BNS provisions and the Information Technology Act.
In an order dated July 22, the court said, "Custodial interrogation is strictly required for the recovery of the specific digital devices used to transmit the fabricated confessions, and shielding the applicant with pre-arrest bail would practically guarantee the destruction of these digital footprints."
According to the prosecution, the complainant, Prateek Paul, a PhD scholar at Columbia University, alleged that Mukherjee created fake email IDs in his name and sent these fabricated mails to agencies, including the FBI, the US Department of Justice and the Department of Homeland Security, falsely confessing to the assassination of Kirk.
The emails allegedly contained details of Paul's passport, visa and New York ID, following which US authorities visited his residence in New York.
The prosecution claimed the acts were committed in the backdrop of a matrimonial dispute between Mukherjee and Paul's sister. It also alleged that Mukherjee made false complaints against his wife before Qatar immigration authorities and against his mother-in-law before the Income Tax Department.
Opposing the bail plea, the prosecution said Mukherjee had failed to join the investigation and his custodial interrogation was necessary to recover electronic devices used in the alleged offence.
Rejecting the plea, the court said the allegations went beyond a matrimonial dispute and disclosed a "highly sophisticated" cyber crime.
"The court finds that not only has the applicant actively evaded the investigation despite the issuance of a statutory notice under Section 35(3) BNSS, but there is also no averment about the clean antecedents of the applicant in his bail application," the judge said.
The court also noted that Mukherjee had allegedly suppressed the fact that the Delhi High Court had earlier held him guilty of contempt and issued non-bailable warrants against him, observing that such concealment disentitled him to discretionary relief.
