Case Note & Summary
The applicant, Abhaykumar Rajalal Prasad, filed a successive regular bail application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in connection with FIR No.11201018250009 of 2025 registered with C.I.D. Cyber Crime Police Station, Gandhinagar, for offences under Sections 316(2), 316(5), 61(2) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Sections 21(3), 23, 25(1) of the Banning of Unregulated Deposit Schemes Act, 2019, and Sections 66(C), 66(D) of the Information Technology Act, 2000. The applicant was arrested on 20.03.2025 and had been in custody for about one year. His earlier bail application (Criminal Misc. Application No.18094 of 2025) was dismissed on 08.09.2025, and the order was confirmed by the Supreme Court. The applicant contended that he was merely an employee of the co-accused and acted at their behest, and that out of Rs.6.6 crores deposited in his account, over Rs.4 crores had been disbursed to the complainant. He also argued that there was no progress in trial and charge had not been framed. The State opposed, citing no change in circumstances. The Court observed that the earlier dismissal was based on the gravity of the offence, but the applicant had been in custody for one year with no trial progress. The Court held that continued incarceration would serve no purpose and granted bail on certain conditions, including furnishing a bond of Rs.50,000 and one surety, not tampering with evidence, not inducing witnesses, and not leaving India without permission. The Court also clarified that observations were only for bail and not for trial.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure - Bail - Successive Bail Application - Change in Circumstances - The applicant, an employee, sought bail after one year of incarceration and no charge framing - Court held that long incarceration and lack of trial progress constitute a change in circumstances warranting bail - Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, Section 483 (Paras 1-6). B) Criminal Law - Cyber Fraud - Employee Role - The applicant was merely an employee acting at the behest of co-accused, and over Rs.4 crores out of Rs.6.6 crores had been disbursed to the complainant - Court considered these factors in granting bail - Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Sections 316(2), 316(5), 61(2); Banning of Unregulated Deposit Schemes Act, 2019, Sections 21(3), 23, 25(1); Information Technology Act, 2000, Sections 66(C), 66(D) (Paras 2-6).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the applicant is entitled to regular bail on the ground of long incarceration and no progress in trial despite dismissal of earlier bail application.
Final Decision
The application is allowed. The applicant is ordered to be released on regular bail on furnishing a bond of Rs.50,000 with one surety of like amount, subject to conditions including not tampering with evidence, not inducing witnesses, and not leaving India without permission. Observations are only for bail and not for trial.
Law Points
- Bail
- Successive Bail Application
- Change in Circumstances
- Long Incarceration
- Trial Delay
- Employee Role
- Disbursement of Amount
