RAKESH S/O RAJENDRA PRASAD KHETANversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

                                                11 TO 14 -ABA-2700-2026(+).ODT




       IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
              CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

  ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2700 OF 2026 (S-11)

Rakesh S/o. Rajendra Prasad Khetan                           …Applicant
      Versus
The State of Maharashtra And State of Assam                  …Respondents
                             WITH
  ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2701 OF 2026 (S-12)
Rakesh S/o. Rajendra Prasad Khetan         …Applicant
      Versus
The State of Maharashtra And Anr.          …Respondents
                             WITH
  ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2703 OF 2026 (S-13)
Rakesh S/o. Rajendra Prasad Khetan          …Applicant
      Versus
The State of Maharashtra And State of Delhi …Respondents
                             WITH
  ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2704 OF 2026 (S-14)
Rakesh S/o. Rajendra Prasad Khetan            …Applicant
      Versus
The State of Maharashtra And State of Gujarat …Respondents


Adv. Anand Mishra a/w Adv. Niraj Yadav, Adv. Abdullah Shaikh,
Adv. Kavita Gandhi, for Applicant.

Mr. Ashok S. Gawai, APP., for Respondent – State
in ABA No. 2700/2026.

Mrs. Geeta P. Mulekar, APP, for Respondent – State
in ABA No. 2701/2026 and ABA No. 2703/2026.
Mr. Arfan Sait, A.P. P., for Respondent – State
in ABA No. 2704/2026.
API Pandit Shirse, MIDC Police Station, Mumbai, is present.




                                 Page 1 of 16
                            th
                          30 September 2026
                                                 11 TO 14 -ABA-2700-2026(+).ODT




                      CORAM :           PRAFULLA S. KHUBALKAR, J.
                      DATE         :    30TH SEPTEMBER 2026
P. C:-

                         COMMON ORDER

1.       Heard learned counsel for applicant as well as learned

Assistant Public Prosecutors in respective matters.


2.       The applicant has filed these four applications under

Section 482 of The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023

(for short, “BNSS”) seeking transit anticipatory bail in

connection with offences registered against him in four different

jurisdictions. In these applications the applicant has stated that

he has apprehension of arrest by respective police stations,

which is based on allegations of economic cyber offences in

varied manners and has therefore approached to this Court

seeking transit anticipatory bail.


          In Anticipatory Bail Application No. 2700 of 2026

     Apprehending arrest in connection with offence registered

with Assam Guwahati Central Chandmari Police Station, Assam,

for the offence punishable under Stations 318(4), 319(2) of The

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 66(C) and 66(D) of



                                  Page 2 of 16
                             th
                          30 September 2026
                                               11 TO 14 -ABA-2700-2026(+).ODT




The Information Technology Act, 2000, the applicant has filed

instant application.

       In Anticipatory Bail Application No. 2701 of 2026

    Apprehending arrest in connection with Crime No. 283 of

2026 dated 21.08.2026, registered with Ratnagiri City Police

Station, Ratnagiri, for the offence punishable under Stations

318(4), 319(2) of The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and

Sections 66(C) and 66(D) of The Information Technology Act,

2000, the applicant has filed instant application.

       In Anticipatory Bail Application No. 2703 of 2026

    Apprehending arrest in connection with offence registered

with Delhi Special Cell (SB) Police Station, Delhi for the offence

punishable under Stations 318(4), 319(2) of The Bharatiya

Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 66(C) and 66(D) of The

Information Technology Act, 2000, the applicant has filed

instant application.

       In Anticipatory Bail Application No. 2704 of 2026

     The applicant is apprehending arrest in connection Crime

No. 11214008261014 of 2026, registered with Bardoli Town

Police Station, Surat, State of Gujarat, for the offence punishable

under Stations 308(6), 127(4), 317(4), 318(4), 319(2), 336(3),

                                Page 3 of 16
                           th
                         30 September 2026
                                               11 TO 14 -ABA-2700-2026(+).ODT




337, 340(2), 61(2)(A) of The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023

and Sections 66(C) and 66(D) of The Information Technology

Act, 2000 and for seeking pre-arrest transit anticipatory bail,

the applicant has filed instant application.


3.    Learned counsel for applicant submits that the applicant

has apprehension of arrest in view of offences registered against

him at above mentioned police stations on the basis of

allegations made by the respective complainants. The crux of

the prosecution case in all the FIRs is based on the allegations of

Cyber fraud allegedly committed against the complainants

therein. It is alleged in the reports that the complainant has

received a phone call from certain persons who claimed

themselves to be representatives of Ministry of India or Mumbai

Police and DSP and conveyed to the complainant that various

complainants were received by the Government with respect to

the mobile number of the complainant and since severe action

was contemplated against the complainant, they were induced

to pay huge amounts to those persons.




                                Page 4 of 16
                           th
                         30 September 2026
                                                  11 TO 14 -ABA-2700-2026(+).ODT




Details of Offences : -


4.     In ABA No. 2700 of 2026, it is alleged that the FIR came

to be registered with Assam Guwahati Central Chandmari Police

Station, Assam, in connection with economic fraud perpetrated

against the applicant. The applicant has not filed on record any

copy of FIR in this case. It is alleged that certain amount was

transferred by the complainant to the accounts of the accused

persons, which in turn was diverted to different accounts

including   account       of this applicant            and ultimately       the

complainants were cheated.

     In ABA No. 2701 of 2026, FIR No. 283 of 2026 came to be

registered with Ratnagiri Police Station, Dist. Ratnagiri, in which

the complainant has alleged that he was induced to pay an

amount of Rs. 87,45,543/- by using threat perception by the

accused persons. It is alleged that the said amount was

transferred by the accused persons to different accounts

including account of this applicant, which was subsequently

transferred to further accounts and ultimately the complainants

were cheated.




                                   Page 5 of 16
                              th
                            30 September 2026
                                                11 TO 14 -ABA-2700-2026(+).ODT




    In ABA No. 2703 of 2026, a FIR came to be registered with

Delhi Special Cell (SB) Police Station, Delhi where it is alleged

that on review of the applicant’s account records, it was

revealed that high-velocity transactions had taken place

reflecting withdrawal of a near-identical sum from applicant’s

account on the very same day. In this case, the applicant has not

filed copy of FIR in this offence.

      In ABA No. 2704 of 2026, the FIR bearing No.

11214008261014 of 2026, registered with Bardoli Town Police

Station, Surat, State of Gujarat is registered on the allegation

that the complainant was defrauded of Rs. 2,96,00,000/-

through a digital arrest scam. It is alleged that the accused

impersonated as officials from the ED, CBI, RBI and the Bombay

High Court and thus by exploiting fear, threatened the

complainant with 10 years of imprisonment in a Mumbai prison

to induce the massive financial transfer. It is alleged that the

said amount was transferred by the accused persons to different

accounts including account of this applicant, which was

subsequently transferred to further accounts and ultimately the

complainants were cheated. Shocking to note, in this report it is

alleged that the accused persons have forwarded to the

                                 Page 6 of 16
                            th
                          30 September 2026
                                               11 TO 14 -ABA-2700-2026(+).ODT




complainant a fake arrest warrant and communication with fake

signature and stamp of The Chief Justice of Bombay High Court.



Arguments advanced on behalf of Applicant : -


5.    Advocate Anand Mishra Learned counsel for applicant

submits that the crux of all the allegations is that the accused

persons have allegedly transferred the substantial amounts in

his account and only for this reason, his name is likely to be

implicated.


The submissions of applicant are briefly stated thus


(i) It is submitted that the applicant has no connection with the

entire offences and in fact the applicant’s SIM card is misused by

certain persons for the purpose of committing the offence and

the applicant himself is a victim.


(ii) The applicant and his wife were in a need of financial

assistance for their business purpose and they came in contact

with Mr. Dattatray Raghunath Sarode, who introduced them

with one Mr. Atul Singh and in turn with Mr. Rakesh Khetan. On

their instructions, the applicant reached at Faridabad where he


                                Page 7 of 16
                           th
                         30 September 2026
                                                11 TO 14 -ABA-2700-2026(+).ODT




met certain other persons who assured them of granting

financial assistance of Rs. 5,00,00,000/-. It is stated that on the

say of those persons the applicant handed over SIM card of his

mobile, which is ultimately misused by them for the purpose of

collecting huge amounts from the complainants and thereby

committed Cyber fraud.

(iii) It is thus submitted by the applicant that without his

knowledge his SIM card is misused and he is made the

scapegoat. He submits that on the basis of Cyber fraud

committed by the other accused persons, the name of this

applicant is implicated and therefore he has an apprehension of

arrest by respective police stations.

(iv) The applicant has categorically submitted that total amount

of Rs. 2,00,30,000/- (Rupees Two Crore Thirty Thousands only)

was transferred in the account of applicant’s company by name

‘GPRS REALTY’ maintained with ICICI Bank and the said

amount got transferred to different accounts.

(v) The applicant has also alleged that having realised that huge

transactions were made from his account and therefore he has

also approached to the police authorities at MIDC Police Station,



                                 Page 8 of 16
                            th
                          30 September 2026
                                                11 TO 14 -ABA-2700-2026(+).ODT




Andheri East, Brihanmumbai. He submitted that after visiting

the police station it was revealed that an offence is registered

against the applicant at Ratnagiri Police Station, Dist. Ratnagiri

and it was revealed that several other offences were likely to be

registered against the applicant at several other places. He has

stated that he has lodged a complaint with Cyber Crime on 26 th

August 2026, however, it was revealed that several offences

were registered against the applicant and in view of this, the

applicant has apprehension of arrest.

6.    In short, the submissions of applicant are that he himself

is a victim since his SIM card is used by the accused persons

without his permission. He also submits that there are no

allegations in the FIR against the applicant, neither his SIM card

was used for making any calls to the complainants and as such

merely because certain amount was received in his account he

can not be branded as an accused persons. In view of the above,

the applicant has approached to the Sessions Court seeking

transit anticipatory bail in connection with all the offences,

however his applications came to be rejected and has thereafter

filed the instant applications seeking transit anticipatory bail.



                                 Page 9 of 16
                            th
                          30 September 2026
                                              11 TO 14 -ABA-2700-2026(+).ODT




7.    By relying on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court

in the matter of Priya Indoria Versus State of Karnataka and

others reported in (2024) 4 SCC 749, learned counsel for

applicant submitted that the applicant be granted transit

anticipatory bail for a limited period for enabling him to

approach to the respective Sessions Court in different States for

seeking anticipatory bail.


Arguments advanced by Assistant Public Prosecutors : -

8.    As against this, learned Assistant Public Prosecutors for

respondent - State in all the matters have vehemently opposed

the applications. Learned APPs for respondent – State has

submitted that the applicant has failed to make out the case for

seeking transit anticipatory bail since he has failed to

demonstrate    any   exceptional       circumstances        showing     his

inability to approach to the concerned Sessions Courts in whose

jurisdiction the offences are registered. It is also submitted that

the applicant has failed to demonstrate any apprehension of

violation of his right to liberty owing to arbitrariness of the

police authorities and as such the applicant has failed to

establish a case of transit anticipatory bail even in accordance


                              Page 10 of 16
                             th
                         30 September 2026
                                             11 TO 14 -ABA-2700-2026(+).ODT




with the parameters laid down by the judgment of the Hon’ble

Supreme Court in the matter of Priya Indoria (cited supra).

9.    It is also submitted that in Anticipatory Bail Application

No. 2704 of 2026, the applicant has prayed for blanket

anticipatory bail and this is gross misuse of the right to seek

transit anticipatory bail. With respect to the said offences,

although the applicant alleges to have submitted the complaint

on 3rd September 2026 at MIDC Police Station, Andheri.

Mumbai, it is pointed out by the learned APP that the applicant

himself has failed to attend to the MIDC Police Station, Andheri

even after he was repeatedly called. Thus, it is submitted that

the applicant has avoided co-operation to the investigating

agency and is not entitled to seek any protection as claimed.

Further, it is also submitted that considering the gravity and

magnitude of the offences showing a Cyber fraud to the tune of

Rs. 2,00,30,000/- which is routed through the account of this

applicant, his involvement in the offence is apparent and

therefore, the applicant is not entitled for any kind of protection

in the nature of transit anticipatory bail.




                             Page 11 of 16
                            th
                          30 September 2026
                                            11 TO 14 -ABA-2700-2026(+).ODT




Consideration of the contentions and reasons : -

10.    In the backdrop of above submissions rival contentions fall

for my consideration.


11.    It has to be noted that the applicant has prayed for grant

of transit anticipatory bail in all the above referred four

offences. As such the position of law as laid down by the

Hon’ble Supreme Court in several matters including the

judgment of Priya Indoria (cited supra) needs to be primarily

considered while entertaining these applications. The position of

law is reiterated by the Hon’ble Supreme Court holding that

power to grant extra-territorial anticipatory bail should be

exercised in exceptional and compelling circumstances. It has

also to be noted that while considering the application for extra

territorial anticipatory bail, the Court is empowered to grant

interim protection for a fixed period and direct the applicant to

make an application before the court of competent jurisdiction.

The position of law is finetuned by the Hon’ble Supreme Court

in the judgment of Priya Indoria (Supra) holding in para 93.4

that




                            Page 12 of 16
                           th
                         30 September 2026
                                              11 TO 14 -ABA-2700-2026(+).ODT




          “ The applicant for anticipatory bail must
          satisfy the court regarding his inability to seek
          anticipatory bail from the court which has the
          territorial jurisdiction to take cognizance of
          the offence. ”

12.    As such, it becomes amply clear that the applicant has to

make    out   an    exceptional      case      and    show     compelling

circumstances to seek extra-territorial anticipatory bail and on

the basis of such compelling circumstances, the Court must

record its satisfaction that a case is made out for grant of

interim protection, even for a fixed period.

13.    In the backdrop of legal position, when the instant

applications are considered, it has to be noted that the First

Information Report in all the four cases were filed prior to one

month. Pertinent to note,

(a) In ABA No. 2701 of 2026, the FIR (Ratnagiri Police Station)

is dated 21st August 2026;

(b) In ABA No. 2704 of 2026, the FIR (Bardoli Town Police

Station, Surat, State of Gujarat) is dated 31st August 2026;

(c) In ABA No. 2703 of 2026, the FIR with Delhi Special Cell

(SB) Police Station, Delhi is prior to 3rd September 2026 (which

is the date of notice under section 35(3) of BNSS - Exh. O) ; and

                              Page 13 of 16
                             th
                          30 September 2026
                                            11 TO 14 -ABA-2700-2026(+).ODT




(d) In ABA No. 2700 of 2026, the FIR with Assam Guwahati

Central Chandmari Police Station, Assam, is prior to 3 rd

September 2026(which is the date of notice under section 35(3)

of BNSS – Exh. O ).

          In this regard, it has to be noted that the applicant has

not filed copies of FIR in ABA Nos. 2703 of 2026 and 2700 of

2026, but has filed the Notices (at Exh. ‘O’) under section 35(3)

of BNSS. It has also to be noted that the applicant himself stated

(in Para – 13 in ABA No. 2703 of 2026 and ABA No. 2700 of

2026) that total five FIRs are registered against the applicant.

14.   It has to be noted that the applicant has only averred in

the applications that offences are registered against him and

therefore, he has apprehension of arrest. Pertinent to note, the

applicant has failed to specifically point out on affidavit any

reasons showing his inability to seek anticipatory bail from the

court which has the territorial jurisdiction to take cognizance of

offences. It is crucial to note that the FIRs are registered against

the applicant prior to more than one month and as such it was

imperative for the applicant to satisfy the Court regarding

compelling circumstances showing his inability to approach to



                            Page 14 of 16
                           th
                         30 September 2026
                                                  11 TO 14 -ABA-2700-2026(+).ODT




the concerned Courts. Mere registration of FIRs is sought to be

projected as compelling circumstances and only because

offences    are     registered,     the     applicant       has   straightway

approached to this Court for seeking transit anticipatory bail. It

has to be noted that even for seeking transit anticipatory bail,

the applicant has to make out the case for seeking protection

under Section 482 of BNSS. As such, the factors which are

required to be considered while granting anticipatory bail need

to be considered, rather with more precaution, while granting

extra-territorial anticipatory bail.

        Although the applicant is seeking transit anticipatory bail

and interim protection for a fixed period, I am of the opinion

that even while considering the grant of such protection for a

limited period, all the factors including nature and gravity of

accusations, possibility of the applicant to flee from justice and

other    relevant    factors    needs      to      be   considered.     Transit

anticipatory bail cannot be sought for merely because the same

is prayed for a limited period.

15.     In view of the above considerations if the applications

filed by the applicant are considered, it has to be noted that the



                                  Page 15 of 16
                               th
                            30 September 2026
                                            11 TO 14 -ABA-2700-2026(+).ODT




applicant has failed to demonstrate any reasons showing his

inability to seek anticipatory bail from the Court which has got

the territorial jurisdiction to take cognizance of offence. After

giving anxious consideration to the contentions of the applicant,

I am not satisfied that the applicant has made out the case for

seeking protection of extra-territorial anticipatory bail. Hence, I

am of the considered opinion that all the four applications

deserve to be rejected and accordingly, all the four applications

are rejected.



                                   (PRAFULLA S. KHUBALKAR, J.)
VDMokal/-




                            Page 16 of 16
                           th
                         30 September 2026