Ghanshyam Jagannath Dayama v. State of Maharashtra
In the High Court of Bombay
A.B.A. 34/2021
Before Justice S.V. Kotwal
Decided on January 12, 2021

Relevancy of the Case: Anticipatory bail application in a case involving unauthorised changes to computer records at an RTO office for benefits

Statutes and Provisions Involved

• The Information Technology Act, 2000 (Section 65, 66)
• The Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Section 420, 466, 468, 471, 167, 34)

Relevant Facts of the Case

• The Assistant Regional Transport Officer filed an FIR against the applicant. The applicant was responsible for maintaining the vehicle registration records of the RTO office.
• The applicant’s fault allegedly led to tampering with the said computer records.

Prominent Arguments by the Advocates

• The applicant’s counsel argued that the applicant had assistants working under him. They could have changed the said records, or it could be a case of system hacking. The custodial interrogation would cause irreparable damage to the applicant’s health. He suffered a major brain stroke in 2016. Hence, the court should grant him anticipatory bail.
• The respondent’s counsel submitted that the offence in the present case is serious. There are sufficient reasons to believe that only the applicant has committed this offence. The applicant’s cooperation with the investigation would discard any apprehension of his arrest because that would not be necessary.

Opinion of the Bench

• Considering the applicant’s health condition, the court would accept the bail application provided he cooperates with the investigation.

Final Decision

• The court granted anticipatory bail to the applicant.