Bombay High Court
SHIVTEJ POTEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
- Decided
- Disposal
- Dismissed
Holding
Anticipatory bail was not granted as the offences were deemed grave and the applicant was already in custody for a similar crime.
Summary
Shivtej Pote applied for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, alleging that he might be arrested in connection with FIR No. 358 of 2024 involving alleged phishing and "digital arrest" of a victim who transferred Rs 1.08 crore after being deceived by callers posing as bank and police officials. The prosecution alleged that the applicant obtained the victim’s bank and Aadhaar details and facilitated the fraud, and noted that the applicant was already in custody for a similar cyber offence. The High Court examined whether the seriousness of the offences and the applicant’s prior arrest justified denial of bail. It held that the offences were grave and the applicant’s involvement warranted denial of anticipatory bail. Consequently, the court dismissed the anticipatory bail application, directing the trial court to decide the case on its merits without being influenced by the present order.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the applicant under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 in view of the seriousness of the alleged cyber‑fraud offences and his prior custody.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 205, 308(1), 316(2), 318(4), 319(2), 336(3), 3(5), 482
- Information Technology Act, 2008 — s. 66(C), 66(D)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- pre‑arrest bail
- cyber fraud
- phishing
- digital arrest
- Section 482
- IT Act 2008
- grave offence
Judgment
902 ABA-2359-2026.DOC
skt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2359 OF 2026
Shivtej Pote …Applicant
Vs.
State of Maharashtra …Respondent
Mr. Siddharth Agarwal (VC) a/w. Mr. Ganesh Pandit, for the
Applicant.
Ms.Savita M. Yadav, APP for the Respondent-State.
PSI V.V. Patil, Cyber Police Station, Pimpri Chinchwad.
CORAM: MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.
DATE : 29th AUGUST, 2026
P. C.:
1. By this Application filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya
Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, the Applicant is seeking pre-arrest bail in
connection with C.R. No. 358 of 2024 registered with Chinchwad
Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 205,
308(1), 316(2), 318(4), 319(2), 336(3), 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya
Sanhita, 2023 and Section 66(C), 66(D) of the Information
Technology Act, 2008.
2. The prosecution case is set out in paragraph Nos. 2 and 3 of
order dated 30th July, 2026 passed by learned Additional Sessions
Page 1 of 5
29th August, 2026
902 ABA-2359-2026.DOC
skt
Judge, Pimpri Chinchwad, Pune in Anticipatory Bail Application
No. 854 of 2026. The said paragraph Nos. 2 and 3 read as under :-
“2. The First Information Report was lodged on
09.09.2024 by the informant, Umesh Prabhakar Lele,
alleging that on 06.09.2024, he received a call from
mobile number 9977755420. The caller introduced
himself as an employee of SBI Customer Service and
informed the informant that an amount of Rs.
10,09,669/- was shown as recoverable from his
account in Mumbai. The informant replied that he
did not have any bank account in Mumbai.
Thereafter, the caller informed him that the call
would be transferred to the Mumbai Police and
disconnected the call. Subsequently, the informant
received a video call from another person dressed in
a Mumbai Police uniform and cap, who claimed to be
a police officer. The said person asked for the
informant's bank account details and Aadhaar card
number, stating that the information was required for
verification by the CBI. Believing the caller to be a
Page 2 of 5
29th August, 2026
902 ABA-2359-2026.DOC
skt
genuine police officer, the informant disclosed his
bank account details and Aadhaar number.
3. Thereafter, the informant was informed that his
Aadhaar card had allegedly been sold for Rs.
90,000/- and that he was liable to be arrested by the
police and officers of the Enforcement Directorate.
Subsequently, he received a notice issued in the name
of Niraj Kumar, claiming to be a Director of the ED,
alleging that one Suresh Anurag had committed a
fraud of Rs. 2.5 crores in the name of the informant
and that the informant's debit card had been used in
the commission of the offence. The informant was
thereby subjected to a digital arrest. Out of fear, he
was instructed to transfer money from his bank
account to various bank accounts, accordingly, the
informant transferred a total amount of Rs.
1,08,00,000/- (Rupees One Crore Eight Lakhs only)
to various bank accounts referred to in the FIR. After
a few days, he realised that he had been cheated by
the said persons. Accordingly, he approached the
Page 3 of 5
29th August, 2026
902 ABA-2359-2026.DOC
skt
police station and lodged the FIR, pursuant to which
the present offence came to be registered. The
applicant apprehends arrest at the hands of the
police. Hence, the present application.”
3. Thus, as per the prosecution case, the victim was subjected
to digital arrest and the Accused have represented that they are
Mumbai Police. As far as the role of the Applicant is concerned, he
has obtained the bank account details and Aadhaar card number of
the victim with the assistance of the Accused No. 6 who operated
the said account from Udaypur, Rajasthan. The victim due to fear
of arrest has transferred an amount of Rs. 1,08,00,000/- to various
bank accounts. The Applicant is already arrested and in jail in
connection with similar offence in C.R. No. 5 of 2026 registered
with Cyber Police Station, Pimpri, Chichwad.
4. In these facts and circumstances, as the offence is very grave
and as there is one case of digital arrest registered against the
Applicant, no case is made out for grant of anticipatory bail . The
Anticipatory Bail Application is dismissed.
Page 4 of 5
29th August, 2026
902 ABA-2359-2026.DOC
skt
5. The observations in this order are made for considering the
present Anticipatory Bail Application. The learned Trial Court shall
not be influenced by any of the observations made hereinabove
and shall decide the case on its own merits.
[MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.]
Page 5 of 5
29th August, 2026
Checking your session…