1
B.A.1020/24
MHCC020063162024
IN THE COURT OF SESSION FOR GREATER BOMBAY
CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION No.1020 OF 2024
Pooja Deepak Bandwar
Age : 26 years, Occ : Private Job,
Add Vidhyanaga Line No.01,
Plot No.1592, Indora Chowk,
Nagpur – 440014.

… Applicant
– Versus The State of Maharashtra
(At the instance of Cyber Police Station
Central Division, Mumbai vide CR. No.4/2024
… Respondent
Appearance :Advocate Harshali Bhavsar for the applicant.
APP Iqbal Solkar for the respondent / State
CORAM : RAJESH A. SASNE
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE,
COURT ROOM No. 30.
DATED : 30/04/2024
ORDER
This is bail application by the accused u/sec.439 of
Criminal Procedure Code for releasing her on bail in connection with
C.R.No.4/2024 registered with Cyber Police Station Central Division,
Mumbai for the commission of offences punishable u/sec.419, 420, 467,
468, 471, 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 66(D) of
the Information Technology Act, 2000
2
2.

B.A.1020/24
It is the contention of the applicant / accused that she is
innocent and falsely implicated in the present case. The accused is
arrested on 15.03.2024. She has undergone custodial interrogation. The
applicant / accused has no criminal antecedent. The applicant / accused
was arrested only on mere suspicion. Investigation is completed.
Therefore, there is no point in keeping accused behind bars. She is
permanent resident of her given address therefore applicant / accused
prayed for releasing her on bail.
3.

The prosecution opposed the application by filing reply
vide Exh.2. It is the contention of the prosecution that if the accused is
released on bail, it will affect on the collection of evidence. If the
accused is released on bail, there are chances of flee away from justice.
If the accused is released on bail, there are chances of threatening of
prosecution witnesses and tampering of prosecution evidence. Hence,
prosecution prayed for rejection of the application.
4.

Read the application, say filed by the prosecution. Heard
the ld. Advocate for the applicant, ld. APP for the respondent / State.
5.

I have gone through the documents on record. It is the case
of the prosecution that one Miss Kawaljit Surendrasingh Kaur lodged
report stating that on 20.04.2023 she received WhatsApp message from
unknown person. Said person induced her to subscribe You-tube
channel. Said person also offered commission for the completed online
task. She also received link on telegram. She received certain
commission for the work done. Thereafter she was induced to invest the
amount to receive good returns. At last she was duped for
Rs.50,41,597/-. Therefore, FIR is lodged and investigation proceeded.

3
6.

B.A.1020/24
During the course of investigation it was revealed that
amount of Rs.5 lakhs have been credited in the bank account with YES
Bank. Said bank account is of accused Pooja (applicant). Accordingly,
the applicant / accused has been arrested. The ld advocate for the
applicant submits that the applicant has only received the commission
for use of account and she is not involved in the crime. It was revealed
in the investigation that she has received Rs.1 lakh. The applicant was
arrested on 15.03.2024. The investigation in the offence is in progress.
The role of the present applicant is different than accused Vinay Mishra.
Hence no rule of parity can be made applicable. The applicant Pooja is
actively involved in the alleged offence. She had knowledge about the
use of her bank account for credit of amount of fraud. She has received
certain amount from the main accused. Therefore, she is actively
participated in the crime. The investigation is in progress. It is cyber
fraud, technical investigation is necessary. Release of accused will
hamper the investigation. If the applicant / accused is released at this
stage there will be tampering of prosecution evidence. Hence, the
applicant is not entitled to be release on bail. In the result, I pass the
following order :
ORDER
Criminal Bail Application No.1020 of 2024 is rejected and disposed of
accordingly.
RAJESH
ANIRUDDHA
SASNE
Date : 30/04/2024
Dictated on
Transcribe on
Signed by HHJ on
: 30.04.2024
: 02.05.2024
: 03.05.2024
Digitally signed by
RAJESH
ANIRUDDHA
SASNE
Date: 2024.05.04
16:23:56 +0530
( RAJESH A. SASNE)
Additional Sessions Judge,
Gr. Mumbai.

4
B.A.1020/24
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL SIGNED
ORDER.”
04/05/2024
2.21 p.m.

UPLOAD DATE
TIME
J.S. Chavan
NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
Name of the Judge (With Court H. H. Additional Sessions Judge Shri.
Room No.)
R.A. SASNE, Court Room No. 30.
Date of Pronouncement of ORDER 30/04/2024
ORDER signed by P.O. on
04/05/2024
ORDER uploaded on
04/05/2024