Keshav Dutt, v. The State Of Telangana

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.4729 OF 2026 DATE : 20.04.2026 Between:

Keshav Dutt ....Petitioner/A.3 AND The State of Telangana, Through Public Prosecutor, High Court, P.S. Cyber Crimes, Cyberabad District.

.....Respondent/Complainant : ORDER :

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking the Court to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner/A.3 in the event of his arrest in connection with Crime No.1936 of 2025 of Cyber Crimes Police Station, Cyberabad District registered for the offences punishable under Sections 318(4), 319(2) of Bharatiya

Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNS') and Section 66-D of Information Technology Act.

2.

The facts of the case are that on 04.08.2025 at 12:30 hours, a complaint was lodged by Mr.Aman Agarwal alleging offences of cyber fraud, digital impersonation, criminal breach of trust, cheating, and mental harassment against Mr.Shashank Singh Gwal, Mr.Mahendra Singh Gwal, and Mr.Keshav Dutt. It was alleged that between 20.11.2018 and 29.06.2024, the complainant was deceived under the guise of a fabricated person, Natasha Sharma, and induced to transfer substantial amounts aggregating to Rs.70,87,488/- through various banking channels. It is further alleged that the accused misused credit cards, made fraudulent purchases of electronic gadgets, and coerced the complainant into taking loans, all of which were routed to their accounts. Upon digital verification, the complainant discovered that impersonation was orchestrated by Shashank Singh Gwal, who admitted to the fraud but failed to repay the amounts. Consequently, the police registered the present Crime for the above offences.

3.

Heard Sri B.Krishna Karthik, learned counsel appearing for petitioner, Sri M.Ramachandra Reddy, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for 1st respondent - State and Sri S.Ugandhar Varma, learned counsel appearing for the implead respondent-defacto complainant.

4.

The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the allegations in the complaint are false, baseless, and motivated, having been made out of personal grudge and as a pressure tactic for recovery of money arising from an alleged financial transaction. It is further submitted that the complaint suffers from inordinate and unexplained delay, as the transactions date back to 2018 while the complaint was lodged only in August 2025. The petitioner is stated to have no criminal antecedents, is a permanent resident, and has cooperated with the investigation, which is substantially completed, with all material evidence already in the custody of the prosecution. It is argued that the case is based purely on documentary evidence, and custodial interrogation is not necessary. Hence, prayed this Court to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5.

On the other hand learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed for grant of anticipatory bail contending that the complaint prima facie discloses offences alleged against the petitioner. It is contended that the material collected during investigation, including witness statements and bank transactions, indicates that petitioner induced the complainant to transfer money on false assurances, thereby attracting the ingredients of cheating and cyber fraud. The investigation is still in progress and the role of other persons and the flow of funds are yet to be fully ascertained. Grant of bail at this stage may hamper the investigation and enable the petitioner to influence witnesses or tamper with evidence. Therefore, considering the seriousness of allegations, the petitioner is not entitled to bail and prayed to dismiss this petition.

6.

Learned counsel for the defacto complainant also opposed bail stating that the allegations against the petitioner are severe in nature. Unless he is arrested, the investigation cannot be completed. Hence, prayed this Court to dismiss this petition. 7.

Considering the submissions made by the respective counsel and the material placed on record, the document filed by the petitioner shows that A.1 already refunded amount to the

defacto complainant in the year 2024 itself. In view of the same, this Court deems it appropriate to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner subject to the following conditions : i.

The petitioner shall surrender before the Station House Officer, Cyber Crime Police Station, Cyberabad District within two weeks from today, and on such surrender, the said Station House Officer shall release the petitioner on bail on his executing a personal bond for Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) with two sureties, for the like sum each.

ii.

The petitioner shall appear before the concerned SHO between 09.00 a.m and 05.00 p.m., on every Wednesday for a period of eight (8) weeks, for the purpose of investigation or till filing of charge sheet whichever is earlier and thereafter, as and when required.

iii.

The petitioner shall abide by the other conditions stipulated in Section 482 (2) of BNSS and co-operate with Investigating Officer in investigating the case.

8.

Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed. Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed.

_______________ K. SUJANA, J Date: 20.04.2026 Rds

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.4729 OF 2026 Date: 20.03.2026 Rds