Bombay High Court

MOHAMMED ASHRAF ADINA KHILversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Disposal: APPLICATION ALLOWED

Holding

The applicant is entitled to regular bail as the prosecution failed to demonstrate his knowledge of or intent to participate in the impersonation and cheating offences.

Summary

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Mohammed Ashraf Adina Khil, original accused No.2, in connection with a fraud case where accused No.1 impersonated an IAS officer and cheated victims of about Rs.32 lakhs. The prosecution alleged that Khil maintained continuous contact, traveled with, and exchanged financial transactions with the primary offender, suggesting possible participation in the cheating. Khil contended he was deceived, believing the woman to be a genuine IAS officer who could assist with visa matters, and had no knowledge of her fraudulent identity. The Court examined the evidence, finding no proof that Khil was aware of the impersonation or intentionally aided the fraud, and noted that the principal beneficiary of the cheating was the primary offender. Consequently, the Court granted regular bail to Khil, subject to several conditions including furnishing address details, regular attendance before investigating officers, passport deposit, and non‑interference with evidence.

Issues considered

Whether the applicant's association and financial transactions with the primary offender constitute participation in the offences warranting denial of bail.
Whether the applicant possessed knowledge of the impersonation and fraudulent scheme, thereby attracting criminal liability.
Whether bail can be granted despite the seriousness of the charges and the completion of the investigation.

Legislation cited

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 214, 318(4), 319(2), 336(2), 336(3), 339, 345(3), 61(2)
Immigration and Foreigners Act, 2025 — s. 23B
State Emblem of India (Prohibition of Improper Use) Act, 2005 — s. 3, 7

Subjects

bail
impersonation
fraud
cheating
State Emblem Act
immigration law
criminal procedure
presumption of innocence

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:35273
-1-
953-BA-1488-2026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD

BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1488 OF 2026

MOHAMMED ASHRAF ADINA KHIL
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

......
Advocate for Applicant : Ms. Unnezza T. Khan h/f. Mr.
Tahiwarkhan Wajeedkhan Pathan
APP for Respondent - State : Mr. S. D. Ghayal

CORAM : HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR, J.
DATED : 11th AUGUST 2026
PER COURT :

1. The present application is filed by original accused No.2

seeking regular bail in connection with Crime No. 696 of 2025,

registered with CIDCO Police Station, District Chhatrapati

Sambhajinagar (City), for the offences punishable under Sections

318(4), 336(2), 336(3), 339, 214, 319(2), 61(2), 345(3) of

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and under Sections 3 and 7 of the

State Emblem of India (Prohibition of Improper Use) Act, 2005,

and Section 23B of the Immigration and Foreigners Act, 2025.

2. In FIR, the alleged offence has occurred from

22.06.2025 to 22.11.2025. The alleged offence which occurred

during the aforesaid period is that original accused No.1, who is a

woman, allegedly impersonated herself as an IAS officer/Collector

and have cheated several persons for approximately Rs.32 lakhs.
-2-
953-BA-1488-2026

The source information was received by the police officials of

CIDCO Police Station, who, thereafter, upon verification, came to

the conclusion that accused No.1 is using fake identity and

impersonating herself as an IAS officer/Collector, and had been

staying at Hotel Ambassador, Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar, since

last six months. She was therefore apprehended and an inquiry

was conducted against her, during which she could not give a

satisfactory answer. Ultimately, the police officials came to the

conclusion that she had used her fake identity as an IAS officer and

had impersonated herself as an IAS officer/Collector and thereby

cheated several individuals. The offence thus came to be registered

at the behest of CIDCO Police officials. In connection with the said

offence, when the investigation proceeded, the name of present

applicant surfaced. The investigation revealed that the present

applicant was in constant contact with accused No.1 and had

travelled with her on several occasions. Further, there had been

an exchange of cheques and financial transactions between the

present applicant and accused No.1. According to prosecution, the

statements of some witnesses indicate that the present applicant

had accompanied accused No.1 even when other persons were

cheated.

3. The learned Advocate appearing for applicant submits
-3-
953-BA-1488-2026

that the applicant is a resident of Delhi and he was under bona fide

impression that accused No.1 was an IAS officer and could help in

securing visas for his customers. Therefore, he was in regular

contact with her, and the monetary transactions which has been

found between them pertains to said visa work assigned to accused

No.1. He had no personal knowledge about accused No.1 using

fake identity or is impersonating herself as an IAS officer. On the

contrary, he was under a bona fide impression that she is

genuinely an IAS officer and had good contacts within the

bureaucracy.

4. Learned APP appearing for the State by taking me

through the documents on record submitted that there are specific

allegations against the present applicant pertaining to his

continuous acquaintance with accused No.1. He also refers to

narration of prosecution case in final charge-sheet, wherein the

role of the present applicant has been specifically described. It is

observed that the present applicant has been continuously

travelling and remained in contact with accused No.1. The

applicant had also met several persons in the company of original

accused No.1. There are WhatsApp chats and screenshots that has

been routinely exchanged between accused No.1 and present

applicant. Perusal of role that has been attributed to the present
-4-
953-BA-1488-2026

applicant does not reveal that the applicant was aware that

accused No.1 has been impersonating herself as an IAS officer or

that he has intentionally participated in the offence of cheating,

knowing that accused No.1 is using her fake identity as an IAS

officer. The transactions between them may also indicate that

accused No.1 had represented that she would assist the applicant

in obtaining a visa or securing other benefits. On that basis, the

applicant arguably appears to have been a person who was himself

deceived.

5. The entire material, at the most, shows that the

principal beneficiary of the alleged cheating appears to be accused

No.1 and not the present applicant, though there are certain

financial transactions between accused No.1 and present applicant.

Only on this basis, it cannot be said that the applicant is aware

about misdeeds of accused No.1.

6. The applicant has been arrested in the month of

November 2025 and since then, he is in custody. The offences that

has been alleged against him are punishable with imprisonment

extending up to seven years. Since the investigation is complete

and the charge-sheet has been filed, further custody of the present

applicant is unwarranted.
-5-
953-BA-1488-2026

7. For the aforesaid reasons, I am satisfied that the

applicant can be released on regular bail, subject to certain

conditions. Hence, the following order :

ORDER

(i) The Bail Application is allowed.

(ii) The applicant - Mohammed Ashraf Adina Khil be released on

bail in Crime No. 696 of 2025, registered with CIDCO Police Station,

District Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar (City), for the offences

punishable under Sections 318(4), 336(2), 336(3), 339, 214,

319(2), 61(2), 345(3) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and

under Sections 3 and 7 of the State Emblem of India (Prohibition of

Improper Use) Act, 2005, and Section 23B of the Immigration and

Foreigners Act, 2025 on furnishing P.B. and S.B. of Rs.1,00,000/-

(Rs.One Lakh only), on following conditions :

(a) The applicant shall furnish his permanent residential

address along with his contact details, including his e-mail ID,

to the Investigating Officer.

(b) Initially, for a period of two months, the applicant shall

attend the Investigating Officer on every first Monday of the

month between 4.00 p.m. to 6.00 p.m.
-6-
953-BA-1488-2026

Station House Officer of Hazrat Nizamuddin Police Station,

South East, Delhi, within whose jurisdiction it is located, and

mark his attendance on every Friday between 4.00 p.m. and

6.00 p.m. till framing of charge and thereafter shall regularly

attend each and every effective date before the Trial Court.

(d) The applicant shall also deposit his original passport

with the Investigating Officer and shall not travel outside the

country without prior permission of the Trial Court.

(e) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution

evidence or attempt to influence any of the witnesses.

(f) The applicant shall not indulge in criminal activity.

(HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR)
JUDGE

Tandale

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…