IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMAJ I! TUESDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF SEPTEMBEf|j|S TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE iPRESENT: THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 8496 OF 2025 Between: ABHIJIT SAN JAY WAGHMARE, S/o Sanjya Panduranga Waghmare, Aged about 31 years, Occ: Business, R/o 68, Viraj Colony, in front of ST Stand, Naga Ahmed Nagar, Maharastra-414 001. Petitioner/Accused No.6 AND The State of Andhra Pradesh, through Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravathi, Guntur District Respondent/Respondent Petition under Section 480 & 483 of BNSS., is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the grounds filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to ENLARGE the Petitioner/Accused No.6 on bail in connection with CRIME No. 10/2025 on the file of CID Police, Mangalagiri, Andhra Pradesh under Sections 318 (4), 308 (2), 351 (2), 111, R/w 61 (2) BNS Act, 2023 and Section 66, 66-C and 66-D of Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2009 on such terms and conditions. The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Petition and the affidavit filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of Sri. MOHAMMED ZUBAIR AKRAM, Advocate for the Petitioner and of PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, for the Respondent: The Court made the following ORDER: APHC010419662025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) B5B m [3521] TUESDAY,THE NINTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINALPETITIONNO: 8496 OF 2025 Between: 1.ABHIJIT SANJAY WAGHMARE S/O SANJYA PANDURANGA WAGHMARE, AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, OCC BUSINESS, R/0 68, VIRAJCOLONY, IN FRONT OF ST STAND, NAGA AHMED NAGAR, MAHARASTRA-414 001. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND 1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, through Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravathi, Guntur District ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. MOHAMMED ZUBAIR AKRAM Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following Order : ORDER: The Criminal Petition has been filed under Sections 480 and 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNSS’), seeking to enlarge the Petitioner/Accused No.6 on bail in Crime No. 10 of 2025 of CID Police Station, Mangalagiri, registered against the Petitioner/Accused No.6 herein for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 308(2), 351(2), 111, read with 61(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 66, 66-C and 66-D of Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2009. CASE OF THE PROSECUTION: Material averments stemming from the prosecution are that on 15.05.2025 one Murali Mohan Kadiyala had lodged a complainant before the CID, Mangalagiri, wherein he stated that his daughter Midhula Kadiyala has been living in the Bay Area, USA since 2006. Recently, she was approached by an individual via Facebook Messenger, who started discussing Crypto Currency Investments. Initially, she refused to engage, but after her first small investment, she received a good return in her bank account. Encouraged by this, she continued investing large amounts, eventually totalling approximately USD 1.7 Million. It was to sensitive and extensive nature of this case, she attached all relevant physical documents and records, including transaction details, WhatsApp chat histories, reports and other evidence for investigation. The scammer demanded USD 184,000 (Approximately INR 1.6 Crore) to unlock her investments. The scammer had threatened and blackmailed his daughter that if she did not pay, he would freeze her funds. Hence, the above case is registered. 2. CONTENTIONS OF THE COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER: Sri Mohammed Zubair Akram, learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the alleged offence, without any cogent evidence linking him to the commission of the crime. It is contended that the Petitioner is the sole breadwinner of his family and his arrest would cause undue hardship and prejudice to his dependents. The Petitioner undertakes to abide by any condition that this Court may impose while granting bail to the Petitioner. 3. 4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner further submits that in fact the Petitioner himself is one of the victims, whose I.D was used by the main Accused to open the Crypto Wallet Account. It is important to note that the Crypto Wallet Account was not being linked to the bank account of the Petitioner. Custodial interrogation of the Petitioner was also over. The Petitioner has got old aged mother, who had been suffering from breast cancer of advanced stage, and he is only son of his mother and it is urged to enlarge the Petitioner on bail as he has been in judicial custody for more than 33 days. 5. It is further submitted that the Petitioner has a permanent place of residence and there is no likelihood of absconding or evading the process of law. The Petitioner has co-operated with the investigation thus far and assures continued cooperation in future proceedings. It is also urged that the allegations are of a nature that do not warrant further custodial detention, and if any condition is imposed while granting the bail, Petitioner would not violate it; and it is urged to allow the petition. ARGUMENTS OF THE STATE: 6. Per contra, Mr. Neelotpal Ganji, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor strenuously opposed the grant of bail, contending that the investigation is still underway and several material witnesses are yet to be examined. It is submitted that enlargement of the Petitioner seriously hamper the progress of the investigation and on bail at this stage would may result in non cooperation from the Petitioner. The prosecution further apprehends that the Petitioner, if released, obstructing the course of justice. may influence or intimidate witnesses, thereby 7. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor further submits that the Petitioner got 30% commission to use his I.D to open the Crypto Wallet as per the interrogation of the Petitioner during custody of the Police. In the Wallet of the Petitioner, 15 Crores of rupees were there and it is freezed. However, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor further submits that the Crypto Wallet of the Petitioner is not linked up with his bank account. 8. It is also urged that there exists a real and imminent risk of the Petitioner absconding and evading the due process of law, if enlarged Given the gravity of the allegations and the potential threat to the integrity of the investigation, it is submitted that the Petitioner does not deserve the discretionary relief of bail and it is urged to dismiss the bail petition. on bail. POINT FOR CONSIDERATION: In the light of the case of the prosecution and the contentions of the learned Counsel for both the sides, now the point for consideration is: 9. Whether the Petitioner is entitled for grant of bail? ANALYSIS: As seen from the record, the allegation against the Petitioner is that the Petitioner in active cooperation with other Accused, he opened the Crypto Wallet by using his I.D, for which he got 30% commission from the main Accused. The Petitioner was ordered for police custody on 28.08.2025. For about 2 days i.e on 29.08.2025 and 30.08.2025 he was in police custody. He gave certain admissions in the police custody that he took 30% commission for using his I.D and for opening C-ypto Wallet. Undoubtedly, the Crypto Wallet Account of the Petitioner was not being linked to his bank account. Accused No.1 and 2 have been absconding. Accused No.1 allegedly gave instructions to Accused No. 3 to 5 to collect extortion money from the defacto complainant. Accused No.3 to 5 were already enlarged on bail. The Petitioner was arrested on 06.08.2025. He has been in judicial custody for the past 33 days. 10. Indeed, the defacto complainant had not shown the Petitioner Accused in the FIR. The defacto complainant also never transferred any amount to the account of the Petitioner. The Petitioner also not indulged collection of extorted money. The Petitioner is the only son to his mother. The 11. as in Petitioner is only person to look after his mother, who has been suffering from breast cancer advanced stage and he filed medical records to that effect. Major portion of the investigation with regard to alleged role of the Petitioner is completed. This Court on 01.07.2025 in Crl.P.No.6214 of 2025 granted bail to Accused No.5. This Court on 21.07.2025 in Crl.P.No.7113 of 2025 granted bail to Accused No.3. 12. The Petitioner has got fixed abode. The Petitioner is permanent resident of Viraj Colony. Naga Ahmed Nagar. Maharastra. The chances Petitioner threatening the witnesses or hampering the investigation tampering the evidence may not arise. The Petitioner is doing business. Period of custodial interrogation was already completed. of the or CONCLUSION: 13. Considering the nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the Petitioner, his alleged role played in this case, and the period of detention undergone by the Petitioner, this Court is inclined to enlarge the Petitioner bail with the following stringent conditions: on i. The Petitioner/Accused No.6 shall be enlarged on bail subject to his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees two lakhs only), with two sureties each for the like each to the satisfaction of the learned VI Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum- Special Court for CID cases, Guntur. sum The Petitioner/Accused No.6 shall Station House Officer, CID Police Station, Mangalagiri Saturday in between 10:00 am and 05:00 pm, till completion of investigation, iii. The Petitioner/Accused No.6 shall not leave the limits of the District without prior permission from the Station House Officer concerned. II. appear before the , on every The Petitioner/Accused No.6 shall not commit or indulge in commission of any offence in future. The Petitioner/Accused No.6 shall cooperate with the investigating officer in further investigation of the case and shall make himself available for interrogation by the investigating officer as and when required. The Petitioner/Accused No.6 shall indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to IV. V. VI. not, directly or any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer, vii. The Petitioner/Accused No.6 shall surrender his passport, if any, to the investigating officer. If he claim that he do not have a passport, he shall submit an affidavit to that effect to the Investigating Officer. 14. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed. SD/- K.SRINIVASA RAJU ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To 1. The VI Additional Junio. Civil Judge-cum-Special Court for CID Cases, ^radet'”" CID Police Station, Mangalagiri, Andhra 3. The Superintendent, District Jaii, Guntur District. 4. One CC to Sri. MOHAMMED ZUBAIR AKRAM, Advocate [OPUC] High Court of Andhra Pradesh, 6. One spare copy JSS HIGH COURT DR.YLR, J DATED:09/09/2025 BAIL ORDER CRLP.No.8496 of 2025 ALLOWED