Final Order 1

Order Details: Copy of Order
Pdf Text: Bail App. No. 310/2026
Crime No. 925/2026
Ayush and other vs State
U/Sec. 318(4),319(2) BNS r/w Sec. 66
(C) and (D) of the I.T. Act.
IN THE COURT OF J.M.F.C.(COURT NO. 27)MULUND, MUMBAI
01. This is an application made by the accused by taking
recourse to Section 480 of the BNSS to enlarge them on the bail
02. It is contended that the amount of Rs. 5,50,000/- have
already been recovered before the arrest of these accused. The case is
based on the digital evidence. There is no recovery at the instance of the
accused. The arrest is illegal. Hence, it is requested that the accused be
released on bail.
03. It is countered by the I.O. on the ground that the accused
have involved in the huge cyber fraud and the investigation is in
progress. The A.P.P. also opposed the bail on the ground that during the
investigation total 177 cyber complaints have been revealed against the
accused involving cyber fraud of around Rs. 150 Crore. The accused are
involved in operating the Telegram account wherein several instructions
as to the fraud are being circulated. They operate USDT and BITGET
related apps for conversion of the fraud money. The Hence, it is
requested that the application be rejected.
04. Perused the application, the say filed and gone thorugh the
record.
05. It is seen from the record that the accused came to be
arrested in connection with the crime no. 925/2026 registered with the
-- 1 of 3 --
Mulund Police station for the offence punishable U/Sec. 318(4),319(2)
BNS r/w Sec. 66 (C) and (D) of the I.T. Act. The allegations pertain to
the using of the photo of the informant on a whatsapp and inducing the
payment of Rs. 10,00,000/-.
06. However, what transpires during the investigation is that
there are 177 cyber complaints filed against the accused that involved
cyber fraud of Rs. 150 Crore. The present applicant are allegedly
involved in the operating of telegram channels that have regularly been
used in commission of the cyber frauds. The accused are also said to be
using the USDT and BITGET related apps for conversion of the fraud
money.
07. The accused are also allegedly involved in the Chinese Fund
Management companies. They are said to be connected with the foreign
contacts, telegram accounts, payment channels and crypto wallets.
08. The investigation as against the present accused is still in
progress. The ultimate beneficiary are yet to be traced. Considering
these circumstances and the fact that there are 177 cyber complaints
against the accused with cyber fraud of Rs. 150 crore this is not the fit
case to use the discretion of the court in favour of the accused
applicants.
09. Adv. Bankar for the accused also raised the ground of parity.
The A.P.P. opposed it on the ground that the accused who were
released on bail were the provider of the mule account holder and they
surrendered the substantive amount.
10. The record further shows that one of the accused was given
-- 2 of 3 --
a notice under sec. 35(3) of the B.N.S.S. The two other accused
released on bail were the provider of the mule account. There were no
other complaints of the cyber fraud.
11. The Hon’ble Supreme Court recently in Pintu Das @ Pintu
Kukmar Das Vs State of Jharkljand Special Leal to Appeal (Cri). No.
17866/2026 dated 23/09/2026 refused to grant the bail to the accused
in a cyber fraud for having the antecedents. Hence, having regard to the
material against the accused applicant and the roles they have played
the ground of parity can not be made applicable to them.
12. Adv. Bankar for the accused also raised a ground of illegal
arrest. However, that issue has already been dealt with at the stage of
remand wherein the arrest was justified.
13. Thus, the application being devoid of merits deserves to be
rejected and it is thus accordingly rejected.
Sd/-
(Chetankumar U. Telgaonkar)
Date :- 24/09/2025 Judicial Magistrate First Class,
(Court No. 27) Mulund, Mumbai.
-- 3 of 3 --