Daijiworld Media Network - New Delhi

New Delhi, Jun 17: The Supreme Court on Wednesday declined to entertain a plea filed by a man accused in multiple cyber fraud cases seeking the consolidation of FIRs registered against him in different states, with Chief Justice of India Surya Kant making strong observations against cyber criminals and describing them as “parasites” who exploit innocent people.

A Bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice V. Mohana dismissed the petition filed under Article 32 of the Constitution by a Bihar-based accused, stating that there were no grounds to invoke the court's writ jurisdiction. However, the Bench granted him the liberty to seek appropriate relief before the concerned High Courts.

During the hearing, the Chief Justice strongly criticised cyber fraud networks, observing that such criminals operate across several states and prey on unsuspecting investors.

“You people are parasites. You take money from innocent investors and cheat them. We have to be extremely harsh with cyber criminals,” the Bench remarked orally.

The court further observed that cyber offenders often move from one part of the country to another to evade law enforcement agencies.

“You cheat someone in Tamil Nadu, then move to Jammu and Kashmir and later to the North-East,” the Bench noted, adding that society would benefit if such offenders remained behind bars.

The petitioner had requested the clubbing of FIRs registered in Bihar, Jammu and Kashmir, Tamil Nadu and Karnataka, arguing that all the cases originated from the same alleged cyber fraud transactions linked to an ICICI Bank account opened in the name of M/s Ananya Engineering and Trading Ltd.

According to the plea, the petitioner claimed he was only a matriculate and had no knowledge of stock market trading. He alleged that a man identified as Sanjay Singh, who introduced himself as an investment expert, persuaded him to open the bank account.

The petitioner further argued that unknown individuals subsequently used the account for fraudulent activities without his knowledge and that he neither operated the account nor benefited from any of the transactions.

Seeking relief, he relied on previous Supreme Court judgments concerning multiple FIRs arising from a single transaction and contended that parallel investigations in different states subjected him to repeated summons and coercive action by various investigating agencies.

However, the apex court declined to intervene.

“No case to entertain the writ petition has been made out. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed,” the court said in its order.

The Bench added that the petitioner would be free to approach the respective jurisdictional High Courts for any necessary relief.

The petitioner was represented by advocates Anil Nag, Satyam Shekhar, Abhik Chandra and Adnan.

The Chief Justice's remarks also come weeks after he had clarified comments made in another case regarding the use of the term “parasites.” At that time, he had explained that the term was directed only at individuals who enter professions using fake or fraudulent degrees and was never intended to describe the country's youth.

He had emphasised that India's young population remains the “pillars of a developed India” and deserves respect and admiration.