Bombay High Court
MAYANK PURUSHOTTAM GUPTAversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The Court held that the arrest was effected without the required inquiry, and therefore bail was warranted, granting it subject to conditions.
Summary
The Bombay High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, on behalf of Mayank Purushottam Gupta, who was charged with cheating, breach of trust, and offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, the Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors Act and the IT Act for allegedly receiving Rs. 7.56 crore in his father's bank account. The applicant argued that his arrest on 6 March 2026 was effected without the mandatory inquiry prescribed under Section 35(4) of the same statute, violating procedural safeguards. The Court noted the prima facie nature of the allegations, the lack of a proper inquiry, and relied on earlier decisions of the same Court. Consequently, the Court granted bail with a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 and several conditions, including regular reporting to the investigating officer and restrictions on travel. The bail order was disposed of in the applicant’s favour.
Issues considered
- Whether the arrest of the accused without conducting the inquiry mandated by Section 35(4) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita renders the detention unlawful and justifies bail.
- Whether the prima facie case disclosed in the charge sheet is sufficient to deny bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita.
- Whether the precedents set in Kisan Nagnath Pawar v. State of Maharashtra and Omkar Balkrushna Gade & Ors. v. State of Maharashtra are applicable to the present bail application.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 35(1)(b)(ii), 35(4), 35(5), 35(6), 483
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 316(2), 316(5), 318(4), 3(5), 61(2)
- Information Technology Act, 2000 — s. 66(D)
- Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors (in Financial Establishments) Act, 1999 — s. 3, 4
Subjects
- bail
- procedural lapse
- Section 35 inquiry
- cheating
- breach of trust
- cyber crime
- MPID Act
- IT Act
- criminal procedure
Judgment
5. BA-3459-26.odt
Amberkar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
BAIL APPLICATION NO. 3459 OF 2026
Mayank Purushottam Gupta .. Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent
....................
Ms. Sana Raees Khan a/w Mr. Jinay Jain, Advocates for Applicant
Mr. Amit A. Palkar, APP for State
...................
CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J.
DATE : SEPTEMBER 16, 2026
P. C.:
1. Heard Ms. Khan, learned Advocate for Applicant and Mr. Palkar,
learned APP for State.
2. This is an Application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik
Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking Bail in connection with C.R. No. 13 of
2026 registered with Cyber Crime Police Station, Nashik for the
offences punishable under Sections 318(4), 316(2), 316(5), 61(2) and
3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023; Sections 3 & 4 of Maharashtra
Protection of Interest of Depositors (in Financial Establishments) Act,
1999 and 66(D) of Information Technology Act, 2000.
3. Applicant in the present case is indicted in an offense of
cheating and breach of trust as also under the MPID Act for having
received 7.56 crore as credit in his bank account, rather in his father's
bank account.
1 of 4
5. BA-3459-26.odt
4. It is Prima facie seen from the record that the Applicant who is
arrayed as accused No. 5 has been alleged to have received the
aforesaid amount in the bank account of his father. The Applicant was
in fact called from Rajasthan to attend the hearing after issuing the
Section 35(3) notice, copy of which is appended at page No. 113 of
the Application. He received the notice on 02.03.2026 and came to
Bombay to record his statement and furnish the details. However,
when he approached the police on 06.03.2026, he was straightaway
handed over the reasons for his arrest under section 47(1) without any
due inquiry as contemplated under section 35(4).
5. It is seen that the Applicant was given notice under Section
35(1)(b)(ii) and without contemplating and carrying out any inquiry
whatsoever as contemplated under Sections 35(4) to 35(6), he was
straightaway handed over the grounds of arrest dated 06.03.2026,
copy of which is appended at page 115 of the Application.
6. The case of the Applicant before me is clearly covered by the
decision of this Court in the case of Kisan Nagnath Pawar v. The State
of Maharashtra1 and Omkar Balkrushna Gade & Ors. v. The State of
Maharashtra2.
1 Order dated 25.08.2026 in Bail Application No. 4859 of 2025
2 Order dated 10.09.2026 passed in Bail Application No. 2899 of 2026
2 of 4
5. BA-3459-26.odt
7. Ms. Khan also addressed the Court on merits of the matter
whereby the ledger account of the Applicant having been maintained
by the father of the Applicant qua his trading account wherein the
trading of wheat has taken place.
8. Prima facie arguments are made out on the basis of the
aforesaid grounds and therefore, I am inclined to allow the present
Bail Application.
9. In view of the above, Applicant is released on bail on the
following terms and conditions:-
(i) Applicant is directed to be immediately released from
prison in connection with C.R. No. 13 of 2026;
(ii) Applicant is directed to be released on bail on
furnishing P.R. Bond of Rs. 50,000/- (Rs. Fifty
Thousand Only) with one or two sureties in the like
amount;
(iii) Applicant shall report to the concerned Investigating
Officer, once every month on the first Sunday of the
month between 10:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m.;
(iv) Applicant shall co-operate with the conduct of trial and
attend the Trial Court on all dates, unless specifically
exempted and will not take any unnecessary
3 of 4
5. BA-3459-26.odt
adjournments, if he does so it will entitle the
prosecution to apply for revocation of this order;
(v) Applicant shall not leave the State of Maharashtra
without prior permission of the Trial Court. He shall
deposit his passport, if any, with the Trial Court within
one week of being released from prison;
(vi) Applicant shall not influence with any of the witnesses
or tamper with the evidence in any manner;
(vii) Applicant shall keep the Investigating Officer informed
of his current address and mobile contact number and /
or change of residence or mobile details, if any, from
time to time, as applicable; and
(viii)Any infraction of the conditions shall entail cancellation
of bail granted to the Applicant.
10. Needless to state that the above observations will not come in
the way of trial as they are prima facie in nature based on the
submissions made and the material placed before this Court.
11. Bail Application is allowed and disposed of in the above terms.
Amberkar [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ]
Digitally signed
by RAVINDRA
RAVINDRA MOHAN
MOHAN AMBERKAR
AMBERKAR Date:
2026.09.16
20:14:10 +0530
4 of 4
Checking your session…