Bombay High Court
KISHOR MOHAN KARADEversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA
- Decided
- Disposal
- Allowed
Holding
The Court held that anticipatory bail must be granted to both applicants, subject to prescribed conditions, as the prosecution evidence does not directly implicate them and they have no criminal antecedents.
Summary
The High Court considered two anticipatory bail applications filed under Section 438 of the CrPC and Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita by Ashwajit Anand Bagade and Kishor Mohan Karade, who were alleged to have participated in cyber‑offences under Sections 319(2), 318(4), 316(5), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Section 66D of the IT Act. The applicants argued that they were merely minor participants, had no prior criminal record, and that the main accused had already been granted regular bail. The State contended that the offences were serious and bail should be denied. The Court examined the material on record, noted the lack of direct evidence against the applicants, the existence of bail for the principal accused, and the applicants' willingness to cooperate with the investigation. Consequently, the Court granted anticipatory bail to both applicants subject to strict conditions, including furnishing a bond, providing contact details, and refraining from tampering with evidence or influencing witnesses.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the applicants under Section 438 CrPC and Section 482 B.N.S. in view of the seriousness of the alleged cyber‑offences.
- Whether the applicants have sufficient nexus to the offences to deny bail.
- Whether the existence of bail for the principal accused and the applicants' clean antecedents justify granting anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 482
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 316(5), 318(4), 319(2), 3(5)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 — s. 406, 420
- Information Technology Act, 2000 — s. 66D
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- section 438 CrPC
- section 482 B.N.S.
- cyber crime
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Information Technology Act
- bail conditions
- no criminal antecedents
Judgment
02-ABA-1828-2025.DOC
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
Digitally
signed by
ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.1828 OF 2025
ARJUN
ARJUN VITTHAL
KUDHEKAR
Ashwajit Anand Bagade …Applicant
VITTHAL
KUDHEKAR Date: Versus
2026.08.21
20:48:18 The State of Maharashtra …Respondent
+0530
WITH
ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.3131 OF 2025
Kishor Mohan Karade …Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra …Respondent
Mr. Shailesh S. Kharat, for the Applicant in ABA/1828/2025.
Ms. S. M. Yadav, APP, for the Respondent-State.
API Yogita Kudale, Cyber Police Station, Pune City, present.
CORAM: MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.
DATED: 17 AUGUST 2026
PC:-
1. None appears for the Applicant in Anticipatory Bail
Application No.3131 of 2025.
2. Heard Mr. Kharat, learned Counsel appears for the
Applicant-Ashwajit Anand Bagade and Ms. Yadav, learned APP, for
the Respondent-State of Maharashtra.
Page 1
Arjun
02-ABA-1828-2025.DOC
3. In both these Anticipatory Bail Applications filed under
Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 / Section 482
of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the Applicants
are seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with CR No.819 of 2024
registered with the Cyber Police Station, Pune City, for the offences
punishable under Sections 319(2), 318(4), 316(5) and 3(5) of the
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 66D of the Information
Technology Act, 2000.
4. Mr. Kharat, learned Counsel for the Applicant, points out the
Order dated 7th July 2025 passed by a learned Single Judge in
Anticipatory Bail Application No.1828 of 2025. The said Order
reads as under:
“The learned Counsel for the applicant submits
that the applicant is a student pursuing Civil Engineering
at PG College of Engineering, Pune. Initially, the FIR in
the present case was registered against unknown
persons. The applicant's name was not mentioned at the
inception of the investigation but only came to light for
the first time in the remand report dated 8 December
2024. The learned Counsel submits that the applicant
has been falsely implicated solely on account of certain
minor and unrelated financial transactions with the co-
accused, Savio, who happens to be a childhood
acquaintance. These transactions were of a negligible
amount, innocuous in nature, and bear no nexus with
the commission of the alleged offence. Furthermore, it is
Page 2
Arjun
02-ABA-1828-2025.DOC
brought to the attention of this Court that the main
accused, Savio, has already been granted regular bail in
March 2025. The investigation pertaining to the present
crime has been concluded, and no new material has
surfaced that would implicate the applicant in any direct
manner. The learned Counsel also emphasises that there
exists no direct transaction between the applicant and
the informant, nor has the applicant derived any benefit
from the alleged financial dealings. In light of this, he
argues that the essential ingredients necessary to
constitute offences under Sections 406 and 420 of the
IPC are not made out against the applicant. Moreover, all
relevant documentary evidence is already in the
possession of the investigating agency, and none of it
points toward the applicant’s involvement. Nonetheless,
the applicant is ready to and willing to attend the police
station as and when required and to assist the
investigating officer in dispelling any doubts. The
applicant further undertakes to furnish his bank account
details to the investigating agency and is ready to
voluntarily surrender his mobile phone.
2. By consent, stand over to 5 August 2025.
3. In the meantime, the applicant is directed to
appear before the investigating officer on 9 th, 10th and
11th July 2025, between 11.00 a.m. and 2.00 p.m. and
provide all requisite bank account details, surrender the
mobile phone and cooperate with the investigation.
There shall not be any coercive action against the
applicant in the present crime till the next date.”
5. Mr. Kharat, learned Counsel for the Applicant, states that,
insofar as the Applicant-Ashwajit Anand Bagade is concerned, the
aggregate amount which has come into his account is only
Rs.25,000/-, whereas the amount involved in the offence is
Rs.25,00,000/-. Insofar as the amount which has come into the
Page 3
Arjun
02-ABA-1828-2025.DOC
account of Accused No.6-Kishor Mohan Karade is concerned, the
said amount is Rs.1,47,600/-.
6. Ms. Yadav, learned APP, submits that the offence is very
serious and, therefore, the Anticipatory Bail Application be
rejected.
7. However, perusal of the record shows that the main
allegations are against Accused No.1. Accused Nos.1 to 4 have
been arrested and released on regular bail. As far as the Applicant -
Ashwajit Anand Bagade (Accused No.5) is concerned, he has been
protected by a learned Single Judge by Order dated 7th July 2025
and the said protection continues till date.
8. The Applicant-Kishor Mohan Karade (Accused No.6) is also
protected by the Order dated 17th January 2026 passed by this
Court. The Charge-sheet has already been filed.
9. There are not criminal antecedents against the Applicants.
Page 4
Arjun
02-ABA-1828-2025.DOC
10. Thus, in the facts and circumstances, case is made out for
grant of anticipatory bail. In view thereof, the following Order is
passed:
ORDER
(a) In the event of arrest of the Applicant-Ashwajit Anand
Bagade (Anticipatory Bail Application No.1828 of
2025) and the Applicant-Kishor Mohan Karade
(Anticipatory Bail Application No.3131 of 2025) in
connection with CR No.819 of 2024 registered with
Cyber Police Station, Pune City, the Applicants are
directed to be released on bail on their furnishing PR
Bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/- each with one or two
solvent sureties each in the like amount.
(b) The Applicants shall attend the concerned Police
Station as and when called by the Investigating
Officer.
(c) The Applicants shall furnish their cell phone numbers
and residential addresses to the Investigating Officer
and shall keep the same updated, in case of any
Page 5
Arjun
02-ABA-1828-2025.DOC
change thereto.
(d) The Applicants shall not directly or indirectly make
any inducement, threat, or promise to any person
acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade
such a person from disclosing the facts to the Court or
to any Police personnel.
(e) The Applicants shall not tamper with the prosecution
evidence and shall not contact or influence the
Complainant or any witness in any manner.
11. The Anticipatory Bail Applications are disposed of
accordingly.
[MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.]
Page 6
Arjun
Checking your session…