The Court of Session for Greater Bombay has granted regular bail to Satish Shivaji Chhallare, a 45-year-old resident of Dombivali, who was arrested in connection with a major cyber-fraud scheme involving Forex Exchange Trading. The order, issued by Additional Sessions Judge Rajesh A. Sasne (Court Room No. 30) on May 7, 2024, in Criminal Bail Application No. 1194 of 2024, decisively ruled that further incarceration was unwarranted as the investigation was complete and the charge-sheet had already been filed. Mr. Chhallare was booked under severe sections of the IPC, including 420 (Cheating), 465 (Forgery), 468 (Forgery for the purpose of cheating), and 120(B) (Criminal Conspiracy), alongside Section 66(D) of the Information Technology Act, 2000, registered under C.R. No. 73/2023 at Cyber Police Station, East Region, Mumbai.
The Modus Operandi of the Cyber Fraud
The case involves a sophisticated online scheme that defrauded the informant, Sahid Beg Mirza R Beg, of a substantial sum of money. The fraud began when the informant was contacted via a Telegram account by a person identifying as “Simran.” This individual successfully induced the informant to download a fraudulent Forex Exchange Trading APP. The informant was then persuaded to deposit large amounts of money as investment into various bank accounts linked to the scheme. Upon realizing the deception, the informant reported the loss, which totaled a staggering ₹42,17,093/-. The investigation traced the flow of funds, leading to the arrest of Satish Shivaji Chhallare on January 1, 2024. The prosecution alleged that Mr. Chhallare was an active conspirator and a beneficiary of ₹4,50,000/- from the defrauded amount. Furthermore, the police claimed to have recovered various bank passbooks and debit cards from his possession, indicating his role as a handler of accounts used to launder the proceeds of the crime.
Judicial Rationale: Completion of Investigation and Liberty
The applicant’s counsel, Adv. Firoza A. Shaikh, argued that Mr. Chhallare was falsely implicated, had already undergone sufficient custodial interrogation, and that his continued detention was pointless since the investigation was completed and the charge-sheet filed. Emphasizing that the applicant was the only earning member of his family and a permanent resident of his given address, the defense asserted that he posed neither a flight risk nor a risk of non-cooperation. Conversely, the prosecution, through APP Iqbal Solkar, strongly opposed the application, citing the risk of the accused fleeing from justice, threatening witnesses, and tampering with evidence. Despite these serious apprehensions, the Sessions Judge ultimately favored the principle of personal liberty. The Court acknowledged that Mr. Chhallare had been incarcerated since January 1, 2024. The decisive factor was the procedural advancement—the filing of the charge-sheet—which signaled that the utility of judicial custody for investigative purposes had ceased. The Court concluded that if reasonable conditions were imposed to secure his presence, the applicant would be entitled to bail, negating the need for further custody.
Conditions Imposed for Release and Surveillance
In allowing Criminal Bail Application No. 1194 of 2024, the Court ordered Satish Shivaji Chhallare’s release upon furnishing a Personal Bond (P.B.) and Surety Bond (S.B.) of ₹25,000/- with one or two sureties. Recognizing the delay often involved in securing a solvent surety, the Court allowed a provisional cash bail in the like amount, granting the accused one month from the date of release to furnish the solvent surety, failing which the cash bail would stand forfeited. To secure the prosecution’s interest and address the concerns of potential witness tampering, the Court imposed stringent conditions. The applicant is mandated to regularly attend the concerned Cyber Police Station on the 4th Saturday of every month between 11:00 a.m. to 02:00 p.m., a condition that will remain in force till the filing of the charge-sheet (a condition that seems to be a clerical error as the order states the charge-sheet is already filed, but which is nonetheless a binding condition in the order). Furthermore, he is prohibited from tampering with prosecution witnesses and evidence and must not leave India without the prior permission of the Court. This judgment reaffirms the legal standard that even in complex, high-value cybercrime cases, the right to liberty prevails once the custodial investigation phase is complete.