Miss Lucy
← All judgments

Akshay Sadashiv Galave vs State Of Maharashtra

Bombay High Court8 January 2026Shivkumar Dige

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

Where the investigation is completed, a charge-sheet has been filed, the accused has been in custody for an extended period, there is an absence of call data records connecting the accused to co-accused persons, and the accused has no antecedents, bail may be granted notwithstanding allegations of involvement in the commission of a crime, as the question of actual guilt is a matter of evidence to be determined at trial.

Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.

Judgment

As delivered

2026:BHC-AS:768 11-BA-3776-2025.doc

N.S.Kamble

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 3776 OF 2025

Mayur Sunil Anecha ... Applicant Versus State Of Maharashtra ... Respondent WITH CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 3459 OF 2025

Akshay Sadashiv Galave ... Applicant Versus State Of Maharashtra ... Respondent ________________________________________________________ Mr.Niranjan Mundargi i/b Mr.Keral Mehta, for the Applicant in BA No.3776 of 2025. Ms.Sabiha Ansari a/w Ms.Aaisha Patel i/b Mr.Hulyalkar & Associates, for the Applicant in BA No.3459 of 2025. Mr.P.P. Jadhav, APP for Respondent-State. Mr.V.V. Patil, PSI, Cyber Police Station Pimpari Chinchwad. ________________________________________________________ CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.

DATE : 8th JANUARY, 2026 P.C. :

. Both these Applications are arising out of the same crime,

hence I am deciding these Applications by this common order.

Page 1 of 4

::: Uploaded on - 09/01/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 09/01/2026 21:59:22 ::: 11-BA-3776-2025.doc

N.S.Kamble

2. The Applicants are seeking regular bail in Crime No.25 of

2025 registered with Pimpri Chinchwad Cyber Police Station, Pune,

for the offences punishable under Sections 204, 205, 308, 318, 316(2),

3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 ('BNS' for short) and

Sections 66(C) and 66(D) of Information Technology Act.

3. It is prosecution's case that, First Informant was shown as

digitally arrested by absconding co-accused and they extorted amount

of Rs.52,69,000/- from him by compelling him to transfer the said

amount in various bank accounts. It is alleged that Rs.5 lakhs were

transferred in the bank account of the Accused No.1. The Accused

No.1 had transferred the said amount in the bank account of the

Accused No.2. The said amount was withdrawn by the Accused No.3.

It is alleged that after withdrawing the amount, the Accused No.3

handed over the cash amount of Rs.5 lakhs to the Applicant Akshay

Galave and Avinash Tungar, which was then handed over to Applicant

Mayur Anecha to convert it into the crypto currency. The said amount

is converted into crypto currency.

4. It is contention of learned counsel's for the Applicant's that,

the Applicants have been falsely implicated in this case. No call data

Page 2 of 4

::: Uploaded on - 09/01/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 09/01/2026 21:59:22 ::: 11-BA-3776-2025.doc

N.S.Kamble

records is produced on record to show that the Applicants were in

contact with the co-deceased. The learned counsel further submitted

that the Applicant's does business of crypto currency by investing

money in it. They were not aware that the amount given to them by

the Accused No.3 was fraud amount. They have no antecedents. They

are behind bar around 8 months. Investigation is completed and

charge-sheet has been filed. Hence requested to allow the Application.

5. It is contention of learned APP that, the amount of fraud is

given to these Applicants by the Accused No.3. The Applicants were

aware that the said amount was fraud amount. They are involved in the

crime. The other fraud amount is yet to be recovered. If, the

Applicants are released on bail, they may abscond or threaten the

prosecution witnesses. Hence, requested to reject the Application's.

6. I have heard all learned counsel's. Perused charge-sheet and

documents produced on record.

7. The allegations against the Applicants are that, they have

invested Rs.5,39,000/- of fraud amount in crypto currency. No call

record produced on record to show that the Applicants were in contact

with the co-accused. Whether the Applicant were involved in the

Page 3 of 4

::: Uploaded on - 09/01/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 09/01/2026 21:59:22 ::: 11-BA-3776-2025.doc

N.S.Kamble

crime or not is part of the evidence. The Applicant's have no

antecedents. They are behind bar for more than 8 months.

Investigation is completed and charge-sheet has been filed.

Considering these facts, I pass following order.

ORDER

(i) The Applicants-Mayur Sunil Anecha and Akshay

Sadashiv Galave be released on bail in Crime No.25 of

2025 registered with Pimpri Chinchwad Cyber Police

Station, Pune, on furnishing PR bond of Rs.25,000/- each

with one or two solvent sureties each in the like amount.

(ii) The Applicant shall not tamper with the evidence

and/or influence the prosecution witnesses.

(iii) The Trial Court shall decide the case on its own

merits and in accordance with law, uninfluenced by the

observations made in this order.

(iv) The Application's are allowed in the aforesaid

terms.

(SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)

Page 4 of 4 ::: Uploaded on - 09/01/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 09/01/2026 21:59:22 :::

This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.

Research this judgment with Miss Lucy

Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.

Try Miss Lucy free