NAMDEV VISHNU KALEversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

                                                         11-BA-3110-2025




                                                         Navnath Waghmare (P.A)



       IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
             CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
        CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 3110 OF 2025


Rajendra Bagirath Singh                                  …Applicant
      Versus
State of Maharashtra                                     …Respondent
                                     WITH
        CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 4865 OF 2025
Namdev Vishnu Kale                                       …Applicant
      Versus
State of Maharashtra                                     …Respondent


Mr. Neeraj Yadav a/w Faiz a Shaikh, Deena Punjani for the
      Applicant iin B.A. 3110 of 2025
Mr. Ashwin R. Kapadnis for the Applicant in 4865 of 2025
Mr. Ashoik S. Gawai APP for the Respondent-State
Mr. V.S. Gawale PSI, Gavdevi Mumbai


                       CORAM:         R. M. JOSHI, J.

                       DATED:         04th MARCH, 2026
PC:-


1.     The Applicants are seeking bail in connection with Crime
No. 761 of 2024 registered with registered with Gavdevi Police
Station Mumbai for the offences punishable under Sections 318(4),
111(2) 111(3), 114(4) r/w 3(5) of the BNSS and Section 66(C)
(D) of the Information Technology Act, 2000




                                Page 1 of 4
                                th
                           04 March, 2026
                                                         11-BA-3110-2025




2.       On the basis of complaint made by the complaint Nandlal K.
Punjabi lodged with Gavdevi Police Station, present Applicants
and co-accused were came to be arrested. It is alleged that on
23.10.2024, complainant received link on his mobile phone from
8604025471 to join a WhatsApp group. Since the complainant was
having Demat account, he thought the said link pertains to the said
company. He therefore, joined WhatsApp group. He was informed
about the opening of new account and therefore he opened new
account and he was asked to send Rs. 1 Lakh through the link,
which he sent. This ultimately however found to be a dubious
transaction. During the course of investigation, it was found that
the present Applicants with co-accused have duped number of
persons. On conclusion of investigation chargesheet came to be
filed.


3.       Learned counsel for the Applicant submits that out of 14
accused persons, 10 accused persons are already enlarged on bail.
It is their contention that the role attributed to this co-accused is of
higher degree than one alleged against the present Applicants. It is
their contention that in respect of accused Rejendra Singh on the
basis of the bank accounts reflected in telegram group, his
complicity is sought in the crime. It is further submitted that in fact
the accused persons whoever opened the account are also granted
bail. It is his submission that in view of the same applicant
Rajendra Singh is entitled to get enlarged on bail.




                               Page 2 of 4
                               th
                             04 March, 2026
                                                       11-BA-3110-2025




4.    As far as Namdev Kale is concerned learned counsel for the
Applicant submits that there is no evidence against the present
Applicant except air-ticket to China found on his mobile phone
and that he was seen with the co-accused. It is his submission that
as compared to the role alleged against the accused, who is on bail
attributions against him are of lesser degree with regard to the
antecedents it is submitted that though evidence are registered
against him they are not pertaining to the cyber crime .


5.    Learned APP opposed the application by submitting that an
amount over Rs. 43 Crores is involved in the crime in question. It is
his submission that the evidence on record is sufficient to connect
the Applicants with the crime.


6.    There is no dispute about fact that out of 14 accused
persons, 10 are granted bail by the trial Court. In so far as co-
accused Sandip is concerned as recorded in paragraph 8 of order
dated 25.03.2025 passed in Criminal Bail Application No. 657 of
2025, the said accused is said to have open the bank as per the
instruction of the co-accused. No such allegation is there against
present applicants nor there is evidence on records to that effect.


7.    It is pertinent to note that Sandip is granted bail on
25.03.2025, and bail granted to other accused bail in the year
2025. In spite of the said fact, there is no challenge made to the
order on bail granted to the co-accused. As far as antecedents are
concerned the offences against the Applicant-Namdev are not


                              Page 3 of 4
                              th
                            04 March, 2026
                                                       11-BA-3110-2025




related to cyber crime. Moreover having regard to the nature of
allegations against him and evidence on record and also having
regard to the lesser role attributed to the present applicants in the
crime in question, they are entitled to be enlarged on bail.


8.     Hence, following order.


                                 ORDER


i)     The applications stand allowed.


ii)    Applicants are enlarged on bail in connection CR. No.761 of
       2024 registered with Gavdevi, Police Station Mumbai,
       Applicant be enlarged on bail on furnishing PR Bond of Rs.
       30,000/- with one or two for the sureties subject to
       satisfaction of the trial court.


iii)   Applicants are directed to appears on each date of hearing
       before the Trial Court till conclusion of the trial, unless
       exempted.


                                                   (R. M. JOSHI, J.)
                                                                       {




                                Page 4 of 4
                                th
                              04 March, 2026