Udaykumar Navinbhai Parekh v. State Of Maharashtra

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2858 OF 2025 Udaykumar Navinbhai Parekh ...Applicant

VERSUS

State Of Maharashtra

...Respondent

_________________________________________________________________ VAISHALI ANIL by VAISHALI ANIL TIKAM Date:

2026.03.27 13:12:31 +0530 Mr. Akshay Shah a/w. Harish Shah, Advocate for Applicant. Mr. P.P. Jadhav, APP for Respondent-State.

_________________________________________________________________

CORAM

: SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.

DATE : 24th MARCH, 2026.

P.C. :

1.

Heard learned counsel for the Applicant and learned APP for the State.

2.

By this Application, the applicant is seeking regular bail in Crime No. 65/2024 dated 26/08/2024, registered with Cyber Police Station, Dist. Nashik for the offences punishable under Sections 319(2), 318(4) read with 3(5) and Section 66(D) of the Information Technology Act, 2000.

3.

It is prosecution's case that on 23/12/2021, Applicant and coaccused had opened several bank accounts in various banks and it is alleged that the huge amounts were deposited in the said bank accounts. The said amount is fraud amount.

4.

It is contention of learned counsel for the Applicant that the coaccused No.5, against whom having similar allegations, has been released on bail by the Learned Sessions Court. Learned counsel further submits that the complaint is lodged by bank officer. There is no complaint by any persons, who have been cheated or who have defrauded by the Applicant. Applicant is behind bars for more than one year and six months. There is no progress in the trial. The punishment provided for the offences committed by the Applicant is 7 years and requested to allow the application.

5.

It is contention of learned APP that Applicant has antecedent . He is habitual offender. He has cheated many persons. Applicant has not given explanation for huge amount deposited in the bank account. If Applicant is released on bail, he may abscond or threaten the prosecution witnesses and requested to reject the application. 6.

I have heard both learned counsel and perused the chargesheet, documents produced on record.

7.

Applicant is behind bars for more than one year and six months. To prove the allegations against the Applicant, trial is required. There is no progress in the trial. The co-accused, having similar allegations, has been released on bail.

8.

Considering these facts, I pass the following order

(i) The Applicant- Udaykumar Navinbhai Parekh be released on bail in Crime No. 65/2024 registered with Cyber Police Station, Dist. Nashik, on furnishing PR bond of Rs.25,000/- with one or two solvent sureties 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 Applicant shall attend the concerned police station as and when called and cooperate with the investigating officer. (v) Bail Application is allowed in the aforesaid terms. (SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)