Bombay High Court
GORAKH POPAT BHAWALversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
- Disposal
- DISPOSED OFF
- Bench
- HITEN S VENEGAVKAR
Holding
The court held that the prosecution failed to produce prima facie evidence linking the applicant to the conspiracy or the proceeds, and therefore granted anticipatory bail.
Summary
Gorakh Bhawal applied for anticipatory bail in a cyber fraud case where an informant was deceived into transferring Rs. 1.10 crore via WhatsApp messages allegedly sent from a number impersonating a factory chairman. The FIR named unknown persons, but the prosecution relied on witness statements that placed the applicant in the vehicle and at a pre‑offence meeting at Sanskruti Hotel. The applicant argued there was no material linking him to the conspiracy or any benefit from the proceeds. The court examined the FIR, charge‑sheet and witness testimonies and found that the evidence was insufficient to establish his participation in the alleged offence. Consequently, the court granted anticipatory bail with standard conditions, directing the applicant to cooperate with the investigation and not tamper with evidence.
Issues considered
- Whether the material on record establishes a prima facie case against the applicant sufficient to deny anticipatory bail under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and the Information Technology Act, 2000.
- Whether the applicant's presence in the vehicle and alleged attendance at a meeting constitute participation in the conspiracy.
- Whether the applicant is a beneficiary of the proceeds of the alleged cyber fraud.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 318(4), 3(5), 61(1)
- Information Technology Act, 2000 — s. 66(C), 66(D)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- cyber fraud
- WhatsApp deception
- prima facie evidence
- bail conditions
- IT Act
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
Judgment
1 921ABA1507.2025.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
921 ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1507 OF 2025
Gorakh s/o. Popat Bhawal
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra
...
Mr. Yogesh C. Patil h/f Mr. Abhijit S. More - Advocate for Applicant
Mr. A. M. Phule - APP for the State
...
CORAM : HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR, J.
DATED : 13TH JANUARY, 2026
PER COURT : -
1. The Applicant, by way of present Application, seeks pre-
arrest bail in connection with Crime No. 0008 of 2025 registered with
Dharashiv Cyber Police Station, District Dharashiv, for the offences
punishable under Sections 318(4), 61(1) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya
Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 66(C) and 66(D) of the Information
Technology Act, 2000.
2. It is alleged in the FIR that on 15.04.2025, the informant
received a message from mobile number 7259580338 stating, “I am
Amar Patil. This is my new WhatsApp number; please save it.” At that
time, the WhatsApp profile photo displayed was that of the Chairman of
the factory. The informant, therefore, assumed that the message had
been sent by the Chairman of the factory. It is further alleged that on
16.04.2025, at about 10:16 a.m., the informant again received a
2 921ABA1507.2025.odt
message from the same number, and certain WhatsApp chats took place
between the person operating the said number and the informant. It is
further alleged that on 17.04.2025, at about 09:22 a.m., the informant
received another message from the said number asking him to transfer a
sum of Rs. 1.10 crore to the account of M.K. Enterprises for the project.
The informant alleges that he transferred the said amount to the account
provided in the name of M.K. Enterprises. Subsequently, it was revealed
that the informant had been deceived and that the money had been
erroneously transferred. The informant immediately thereafter
registered the FIR.
3. The learned Advocate appearing for the applicant argues
that the FIR has been filed against unknown persons and that there is no
mention of any role attributed to the present applicant. He further
mentions that the Applicant was not present in the meeting that took
place between the accused persons prior to commissioning of offence.
He contends that there is absolutely no iota of material available on
record to connect the present applicant with the alleged offence. In the
absence of any prima facie evidence on record, he prays that the
applicant be granted pre-arrest bail. He further submits that the
applicant is ready and willing to cooperate with the investigating
machinery on any terms and conditions that may be imposed by this
Court while allowing the present application.
3 921ABA1507.2025.odt
4. Per contra, the learned APP appearing for the State argues
that the charge-sheet has been filed against all the accused persons,
including the present applicant, though the present applicant was not
available for investigation. The learned APP refers to the statements of
witnesses, namely Varadraj Shrikant Gaikwad and Satish Narahari
Deshmukh, who categorically refer to the present applicant by name and
assign a specific role to him, thereby demonstrating that the present
applicant was in the company of the co-accused persons at the time
when the alleged meeting of the accused persons, prior to the
commission of the offence, was held. He then refers to the statement of
one more witness, who is also similar to the earlier witnesses, who
makes a reference to the presence of the present applicant in the Scorpio
Jeep by which all the accused persons had reached Sanskruti Hotel
where the meeting was scheduled to be held between the accused
persons. He thus submits that since the applicant was not available for
investigation, the detailed role of the applicant could not be
investigated, and therefore, custodial interrogation of the present
applicant is necessary for the purpose of investigation. He accordingly
prays for dismissal of the present application.
5. On perusal of the FIR, it clearly makes out a case that the
informant in the present crime was deceived into transferring an amount
4 921ABA1507.2025.odt
of Rs. 1.10 crore from his account to the account of an entity named
M.K. Enterprises. However, apart from the manner in which the
Informant has been deceived, the FIR does not disclose any further
details in respect of the persons involved in deceiving the Informant and
also the manner in which the entire design of the offence was carried
out. The FIR in fact is lodged against some unknown persons stating
that the Informant has been cheated for an amount of Rs. 1.10 crore.
The investigation papers and the statements referred to by the learned
APP do make reference to the name of the present applicant; however,
they fall short of supporting the prosecution’s case that the present
applicant participated in the meeting held at Hotel Sanskruti prior to the
commission of the offence. One statement of a witness suggests the
presence of the applicant in the vehicle by which all the accused persons
reached Sanskruti Hotel, while another witness specifically states that
upon the applicant’s arrival at Hotel Sanskruti, he made an excuse to
depart from the accused persons on the pretext of going to have his
breakfast. Thus, prima facie, it cannot be said that the applicant was
part of the conspiracy meeting that took place between the accused
persons at Hotel Sanskruti. There is no other material at this stage to
link the present applicant with the alleged offence on the basis of the
charge-sheet filed by the Investigating Officer. There is also no material
on record to show that the present applicant has been a beneficiary of
the proceeds of the crime transferred by the informant into the account
5 921ABA1507.2025.odt
of M.K. Enterprises. Thus, for the aforesaid reasons, the applicant has
made out a case for the grant of pre-arrest bail. In the present Crime, six
co-accused have already been released on bail. I pass the following
order:
ORDER
[i] The Application for anticipatory bail is allowed.
[ii] In the event of arrest of the Applicant, Gorakh Popat Bhawal
in connection with C. R. No. 0008 of 2025 registered with
Dharashiv Cyber Police Station, Dharashiv, for the offences
punishable under Sections 318(4), 61(1) and 3(5) of the
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 66(C) and
66(D) of the Information Technology Act, 2000, he be
released on bail on his furnishing P.B. of Rs. 25,000/-
[Rupees Twenty Five Thousand], with one or two sureties in
the like amount.
[iii] The Applicant shall attend Dharashiv Cyber Police Station,
Dharashiv, on every Friday between 11:00 am to 02:00 pm,
and cooperate with the investigation.
[iv] The applicant shall not tamper with evidence or influence
any witness or the complainant in any manner whatsoever.
[v] The applicant shall furnish his current address and contact
details to the Investigating Officer and shall not change the
6 921ABA1507.2025.odt
same without prior intimation.
[vi] The applicant shall not commit a similar offence or any
offence during the period of bail.
6. The observations made herein above are prima facie in
nature and the Trial Court should not get influenced by any of the
observations made herein.
7. The Application stands disposed off.
[HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR]
JUDGE
SG Punde
Signed by: Sandeep Gulabrao Punde
Designation: PS To Honourable Judge
Date: 14/01/2026 14:45:34
Checking your session…