Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 5, Cited by 0]

Bombay High Court

Subhanjan Kayet Son Of Samiran Kayet vs The State Of Maharashtra on 21 December, 2021

Author: Nitin W. Sambre

Bench: Nitin W. Sambre

                       (21)-ABA-2796-21.doc.


                               IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                     CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

          Digitally
          signed by
                              ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.2796 OF 2021
          BALAJI
BALAJI    GOVINDRAO
GOVINDRAO PANCHAL
PANCHAL

                       Subhanjan Kayet                                     ..Applicant
          Date:
          2021.12.22
          09:54:03
          +0530

                            Versus
                       The State of Maharashtra                            ..Respondent

                       Mr. Vivek Gore a/w Mr. Sandeep Waghmare, for the Applicant.
                       Ms. A. A. Takalkar, APP for the Respondent - State.

                                                    CORAM : NITIN W. SAMBRE, J.

DATE : 21st DECEMBER, 2021 P.C.

1. Applicant is seeking pre-arrest bail in Crime No.2 of 2021 registered with Nodal Cyber Police Station for the offence punishable under Sections 420 r/w 34 of IPC, Sections 43, 66, 66B of the Information Technology Act and Section 63 of Copyright Act.

2. The prosecution case is, the applicant along with other co-accused opened and operated illegal OTT platform, generated revenue and got the benefit through cryptocurrency in his account.

3. The submissions of learned counsel for the applicant are the technical support extended by the applicant for opening account is without criminal intention to commit an offence. He would further claim that the amount in the form of cryptocurrency deposited in the account is not operated by the applicant. He would further claim that the investigation in the matter is complete as the BGP. 1 of 2 (21)-ABA-2796-21.doc.

charge-sheet is filed, applicant's custodial interrogation is not warranted.

4. Learned APP would oppose the prayer.

5. Considered submissions.

6. The OTT platform is created and operated with the assistance of the applicant as the applicant was in the business of pirating without any lawful rights over the various programmes. The said OTT platform provided access to various programmes at much cheaper rate as the applicant has no legal right to broadcast of such programmes which are in the form of cricket matches and such other entertainment programmes.

7. It appears that the applicant has aided the main accused Satish in creating the said OTT platform and the preliminary investigation reflects receipt of the consideration in the form of cryptocurrency in the account of the applicant. As such, very complicity of the applicant depicts prima-facie involvement of the applicant in the offence in question is made out.

8. That being so, no case for bail is made out.

9. As such, application stands rejected.



                                          [NITIN W. SAMBRE, J.]

BGP.                                                        2 of 2