Bombay High Court
AKSHAY SADASHIV GALAVEversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
- Bench
- SHIVKUMAR DIGE
Holding
Bail was granted because the applicants had no antecedents, the investigation was complete, and there was insufficient evidence to show they would abscond or tamper with witnesses.
Summary
The Bombay High Court considered two bail applications arising from the same cyber‑fraud case (Crime No.25 of 2025) involving alleged conversion of a Rs 5 lakh fraud amount into cryptocurrency. The prosecution alleged that the applicants received the money from a co‑accused and were aware it was proceeds of fraud, while the defence argued they were falsely implicated, had no prior criminal record, and were merely engaged in cryptocurrency investment without knowledge of the fraud. The court noted that the investigation was complete, a charge‑sheet had been filed, and no call records were produced to link the applicants to the co‑accused. Considering the lack of antecedents, the length of pre‑trial detention (over eight months), and the absence of evidence suggesting a risk of absconding or tampering with witnesses, the court granted bail. The applicants were ordered to furnish a personal bond of Rs 25,000 with sureties and were directed not to influence evidence or witnesses.
Issues considered
- Whether the applicants are entitled to bail under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and the Information Technology Act in view of the alleged fraud and cryptocurrency conversion.
- Whether there is a likelihood of the applicants absconding or tampering with witnesses if released on bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 204, 205, 308, 316(2), 318, 3(5)
- Information Technology Act — s. 66(C), 66(D)
Subjects
- bail
- cyber crime
- cryptocurrency
- fraud
- Information Technology Act
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- criminal procedure
Judgment
11-BA-3776-2025.doc
N.S.Kamble
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 3776 OF 2025
Mayur Sunil Anecha … Applicant
Versus
Digitally signed
NILAM by NILAM
SANTOSH
State Of Maharashtra … Respondent
SANTOSH KAMBLE
KAMBLE Date: 2026.01.09
11:27:22 +0530 WITH
CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 3459 OF 2025
Akshay Sadashiv Galave … Applicant
Versus
State Of Maharashtra … Respondent
________________________________________________________
Mr.Niranjan Mundargi i/b Mr.Keral Mehta, for the Applicant in BA
No.3776 of 2025.
Ms.Sabiha Ansari a/w Ms.Aaisha Patel i/b Mr.Hulyalkar & Associates,
for the Applicant in BA No.3459 of 2025.
Mr.P.P. Jadhav, APP for Respondent-State.
Mr.V.V. Patil, PSI, Cyber Police Station Pimpari Chinchwad.
________________________________________________________
CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.
DATE : 8th JANUARY, 2026
P.C. :
. Both these Applications are arising out of the same crime,
hence I am deciding these Applications by this common order.
Page 1 of 4
11-BA-3776-2025.doc
N.S.Kamble
2. The Applicants are seeking regular bail in Crime No.25 of
2025 registered with Pimpri Chinchwad Cyber Police Station, Pune,
for the offences punishable under Sections 204, 205, 308, 318, 316(2),
3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (‘BNS’ for short) and
Sections 66(C) and 66(D) of Information Technology Act.
3. It is prosecution’s case that, First Informant was shown as
digitally arrested by absconding co-accused and they extorted amount
of Rs.52,69,000/- from him by compelling him to transfer the said
amount in various bank accounts. It is alleged that Rs.5 lakhs were
transferred in the bank account of the Accused No.1. The Accused
No.1 had transferred the said amount in the bank account of the
Accused No.2. The said amount was withdrawn by the Accused No.3.
It is alleged that after withdrawing the amount, the Accused No.3
handed over the cash amount of Rs.5 lakhs to the Applicant Akshay
Galave and Avinash Tungar, which was then handed over to Applicant
Mayur Anecha to convert it into the crypto currency. The said amount
is converted into crypto currency.
4. It is contention of learned counsel’s for the Applicant’s that,
the Applicants have been falsely implicated in this case. No call data
Page 2 of 4
11-BA-3776-2025.doc
N.S.Kamble
records is produced on record to show that the Applicants were in
contact with the co-deceased. The learned counsel further submitted
that the Applicant’s does business of crypto currency by investing
money in it. They were not aware that the amount given to them by
the Accused No.3 was fraud amount. They have no antecedents. They
are behind bar around 8 months. Investigation is completed and
charge-sheet has been filed. Hence requested to allow the Application.
5. It is contention of learned APP that, the amount of fraud is
given to these Applicants by the Accused No.3. The Applicants were
aware that the said amount was fraud amount. They are involved in the
crime. The other fraud amount is yet to be recovered. If, the
Applicants are released on bail, they may abscond or threaten the
prosecution witnesses. Hence, requested to reject the Application’s.
6. I have heard all learned counsel’s. Perused charge-sheet and
documents produced on record.
7. The allegations against the Applicants are that, they have
invested Rs.5,39,000/- of fraud amount in crypto currency. No call
record produced on record to show that the Applicants were in contact
with the co-accused. Whether the Applicant were involved in the
Page 3 of 4
11-BA-3776-2025.doc
N.S.Kamble
crime or not is part of the evidence. The Applicant’s have no
antecedents. They are behind bar for more than 8 months.
Investigation is completed and charge-sheet has been filed.
Considering these facts, I pass following order.
ORDER
(i) The Applicants-Mayur Sunil Anecha and Akshay
Sadashiv Galave be released on bail in Crime No.25 of
2025 registered with Pimpri Chinchwad Cyber Police
Station, Pune, on furnishing PR bond of Rs.25,000/- each
with one or two solvent sureties each in the like amount.
(ii) The Applicant shall not tamper with the evidence
and/or influence the prosecution witnesses.
(iii) The Trial Court shall decide the case on its own
merits and in accordance with law, uninfluenced by the
observations made in this order.
(iv) The Application’s are allowed in the aforesaid
terms.
(SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)
Page 4 of 4
Checking your session…