Bombay High Court
CHETAN SANJAY MAHAJANversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
- Decided
- Disposal
- Allowed
Holding
Bail is granted to the accused subject to the conditions stipulated by the court.
Summary
The High Court considered a bail application under Section 439 of the Criminal Procedure Code filed by Chetan Sanjay Mahajan, accused No.3 in a fraud case involving the ‘Open Hands’ investment scheme. The prosecution alleged that the accused participated in a syndicate that amassed Rs.26.73 lakhs, later inflated to Rs.47.87 crores, and that he received Rs.7.85 lakhs, which has been attached. The applicant had been in custody for over 13 months, and the charge sheet had already been filed, rendering further custodial interrogation unnecessary. The court examined the seriousness of the offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, the Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors Act, and the IT Act, and weighed the applicant’s right to liberty against the risk of tampering with evidence. Finding no compelling reason to deny bail, the court granted bail subject to a series of conditions, including a personal bond, reporting requirements, and restrictions on travel and witness interference. The order expressly limited its observations to bail and did not address the merits of the case.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriateness of granting bail to an accused involved in a large-scale investment fraud under the specified statutes?
- Does the duration of pre‑trial custody and the filing of the charge sheet affect the necessity of continued detention?
- Do the conditions imposed under Section 439 CrPC sufficiently safeguard the trial process in this case?
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 316(2), 318(4), 61(2), 62
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 439
- Information Technology Act, 2000 — s. 66(d)
- Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors Act, 1999 — s. 3
Subjects
- bail
- Section 439 CrPC
- investment fraud
- cyber crime
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- IT Act
- depositors protection
- pre‑trial detention
Judgment
44.BA.945.2026.doc
Ajay
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
BAIL APPLICATION NO. 945 OF 2026
Chetan Sanjay Mahajan .. Applicant
Versus
State of Maharashtra .. Respondent
....................
Mr. Ashok P. Mundargi, Senior Advocate a/w. Mr. Akshay H.
Bankapur, Advocate for Applicant.
Ms. Gauri S. Rao, APP for Respondent – State.
PSI – Mr. Sanjay Mulak, Head Constable – Mr. Nitin Karad, EOW,
Nashik City present.
......…...........
CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J.
DATE : SEPTEMBER 08, 2026.
P.C.:
1. Heard Mr. Mundargi, learned Senior Advocate for Applicant
and Ms. Rao, learned APP for Respondent – State.
2. This is an Application under Section 439 of the Criminal
Procedure Code, 1973 seeking bail in connection with C.R.No.63 of
2025 registered with Cyber Police Station, District Nashik for the
offences punishable under Sections 318(4), 316(2), 61(2) and 62 of
the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNS’); Section 3 of the
Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors Act, 1999 (for short
‘MPID Act’) and Section 66(d) of the Information Technology Act,
2000 (for short ‘IT Act’).
1 of 4
44.BA.945.2026.doc
3. In the present case, Applicant is indicted as Accused No.3 in
the present crime. The principal accused person and the protagonist of
the investment scheme called ‘Open Hands’ was floated by Accused
Nos.1 and 2. Insofar as role of attributed to Accused No.3 - Applicant is
concerned, it is the prosecution case that he was part of the said
syndicate run by Accused No.1 and was present and seen with them.
4. That apart, the total outlay of funds which has been amassed
by the 3 accused persons when the FIR was filed was Rs.26.73 lakhs
from 53 investors. However, the same has now been inflated on further
complaints having been received to Rs.47.87 crores. Insofar as receipt
of any of the funds collected by the accused persons is concerned, it is
prosecution case that Applicant received an amount of Rs.7.85 lakhs in
two tranches in his bank accounts namely of Rs.30,000/- and Rs.4.55
lakhs. The same has already been attached and retrieved by the
prosecution.
5. The Applicant has already been arrested on 02.08.2025 and
has been in custody for a little over 13 months. Charge sheet has been
filed and further custodial interrogation of Accused No.3 - Applicant is
therefore no longer required in the aforesaid facts and role which
attributed to the Applicant.
6. Hence, in view of above prima facie observations and
findings, Bail Application of Applicant is allowed subject to the
2 of 4
44.BA.945.2026.doc
following terms and conditions:-
(i) Applicant – Accused No.3 – Chetan Sanjay Mahajan is
directed to be immediately released from prison in
connection with CR. No.63 of 2025;
(ii) Applicant is directed to be released on bail on
furnishing P.R. Bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rs. Twenty Five
Thousand only) with one or two sureties in the like
amount;
(iii) Applicant shall report to the Investigating Officer at
Cyber Police Station, once every month, on the first
Monday of the month between 10:00 a.m. to 12:00
p.m. until commencement of trial and thereafter shall
attend all dates of hearing before the Trial Court;
(iv) Applicant shall cooperate with the conduct of the trial
and remain present before the Trial Court on all dates,
unless specifically exempted. Applicant shall not seek
unnecessary adjournments. Any such conduct shall
entitle the prosecution to apply for cancellation of bail;
(v) Applicant shall not leave the State of Maharashtra
without prior permission of the Trial Court;
(vi) Applicant shall not influence any of the witnesses or
3 of 4
44.BA.945.2026.doc
tamper with the evidence in any manner;
(vii) Applicant shall keep the Investigating Officer informed
of their current residential address and mobile
telephone number and shall forthwith inform the
Investigating Officer of any change in their residential
address or mobile telephone number, as and when such
change occurs; and
(viii)Any breach or infraction of any of the aforesaid
conditions shall entail cancellation of the bail granted to
the Applicant.
7. It is clarified that the observations made in this order are
limited for the purpose of granting bail only and I have not made any
observations on merits of the case. The trial shall be adjudicated on
the strength of the evidence led and strictly on its own merits being
uninfluenced with any of the prima facie observations made
hereinabove in this order.
8. Bail Application is allowed and disposed in the above terms.
[ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ]
Ajay Digitally signed
by AJAY
AJAY TRAMBAK
TRAMBAK UGALMUGALE
UGALMUGALE Date:
2026.09.08
20:12:50 +0530
4 of 4
Checking your session…