H.C.SHIV 912.BA2474.26.DOC IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO.2474 OF 2026 Paras Vijaykumar Luffa …. Applicant V/s. The State of Maharashtra …Respondent Mr. Arif Z. Khan with Shilpa Sharma, Amit Yadav, Sufyan Mirchiwala, Jasmine Karimi, Humaira Shaikh, Ms. Noor Saba, Akshay Bhalerao, Ali Jawad, Majid Khan, Shahnawaz Merchant i/b Arif Z. Khan & Co. for the Applicant. Mr. T. G. Khan, APP for the Respondent – State. CORAM: SHYAM C. CHANDAK, J. DATED : 27th AUGUST, 2026 P.C. :- 1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties. Perused the record. 2. The applicant seeks his release on bail in connection with Crime No.701 of 2026, registered with Chunabhatti Police Station, Mumbai for offence punishable under Sections 318(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 66(C), 66(D) of the Information Technology Act, 2000 on the report filed on 30.12.2025 by the informant Bapurao Shirke. 3. The prosecution case is that, on 03.12.2025 the informant received messages on his mobile phone that Rs.50,000/- and Rs.49,900/- were debited by unknown persons from his bank account maintained with Bank of Baroda. Therefore, said crime came to be registered. Investigation revealed that said debited amount of Rs.49,900/- was credited in a NRI account and Rs.50,000/- was credited in the bank account of the applicant maintained with Indian Overseas Bank. Further, the amount of HEMANT CHANDERSEN SHIV Digitally signed by HEMANT CHANDERSEN SHIV Date: 2026.08.28 16:33:08 +0300 H.C.SHIV 912.BA2474.26.DOC Rs.50,000/- was credited in the bank account of M/s.Mahalaxmi Garments, a partnership firm owned by other accused namely, Shivkumar Shahabad, Manohar Randive and wanted accused- Sundar Londhe. Thus, these accused and other accused persons cheated the informant. Investigation revealed that from 25.11.2025 to 03.12.2025, financial transactions of total Rs.77,82,354/- were done in the said bank account of the applicant. 4. Mr. Arif Khan, learned Counsel for the applicant submitted that entire fraud amount of the informant is recovered from one of the co-accused. Two co-accused have been released on bail. The investigation is over. Therefore, he may be released on bail. 5. In reply, Mr.Khan, learned APP submitted that the applicant had aided the co-accused to open the bank account in his name to execute their fraudulent scheme. The fraud amount was directly credited in bank account of the applicant. Thus, the applicant was the active participant and direct beneficiary in the Cyber crime. Hence, he should not be released on bail. 6. I have considered these submissions. The accusations against the applicant and two co-accused namely Sujal Tandelkar and Sanket Sharma are similar. Only distinction is that, the bank account in the name of the applicant was opened at the instance of the said two co-accused. Mr. Arif Khan submitted that both accused Sujal Tandelkar and Sanket Sharma have been released on bail. The fraud amount is recovered from one of the co-accused. The applicant is in jail from January 2026 and, his detention in jail is not necessary for further investigation. There is no likelihood of the applicant absconding or tampering with the evidence. He has no criminal antecedents. Therefore, I am inclined to grant the bail. Hence, following Order :- H.C.SHIV 912.BA2474.26.DOC (i) The Applicant – Paras Vijaykumar Luffa be released on bail in aforesaid FIR bearing Crime No.701 of 2026, registered with Chunabhatti Police Station, Mumbai, on his executing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with one or two sureties in like amount. (ii) The Applicant shall mark his attendance at Chunabhatti Police Station, Mumbai on 1st day of each calendar month between 11:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. till conclusion of the trial. (iii) The Applicant shall regularly attend before the trial Court. (iv) On being released from jail, the Applicant shall furnish his contact number and residential address to the Investigating Officer and shall keep him updated, in case there is any change. (v) The Applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence and shall not directly or indirectly influence upon the prosecution witnesses to prevent them from deposing against him. (vi) The Applicant shall not indulge in identical activities for which he has been arraigned in this case. (vii) It is clarified that any observation made in the present order are for the purpose of deciding the present Bail Application and should not influence the out come of the trial and also not be taken as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. 7. Bail Application stands disposed of in aforesaid terms. (SHYAM C. CHANDAK, J.)