Mumbai Court Grants Bail to Owners of Alleged Fake Call Centre Targeting US Citizens
Mumbai court grants bail to fake call centre owners

A magistrate court in Mumbai has granted bail to the two owners of an alleged fraudulent call centre operating in the city's northern suburbs of Vanrai. The decision comes over two months after their arrested employees were released on bail.

Court's Reasoning for Bail

Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate V R Patil granted bail to Deepak Mishra and Arpit Sharma. The court observed that while the alleged offence was serious, its gravity alone could not be grounds for denying bail. The magistrate noted that the police had filed a chargesheet in the case, the investigation against the two accused was complete, and the evidence was primarily documentary in nature.

The court stated, "Therefore, there is no likelihood of tampering with evidence. The chargesheet does not disclose that any victim has approached the investigating agency." It further added that the trial would take a long time to conclude, making it inappropriate to keep the accused in custody indefinitely.

Allegations and Defence Arguments

The Mumbai police had arrested the owners and at least ten employees in September 2025. The call centre allegedly targeted American citizens by calling them under the pretext of renewing antivirus software subscriptions for their computers. The callers would then lure the victims into purchasing gift cards. Police claimed the illicit proceeds were eventually converted into cryptocurrency.

Represented by their lawyer Jay K Bharadwaj, Mishra and Sharma argued that they were directors of a firm named Teamodd Jobs Solutions Private Limited, which was not named in the FIR or the chargesheet. They claimed false implication, highlighted their clean criminal records, and pointed out that the police had not cited a single victim of the alleged fraud. Their bail plea also stressed that with the chargesheet filed, their further custody was unnecessary.

Stringent Bail Conditions Imposed

The prosecution strongly opposed the bail, arguing the crime was serious as it involved duping foreign nationals. They also countered the defence's point about other accused getting bail by stating that those released were merely employees, not owners.

Acknowledging the accused's role as alleged owners, the court imposed stricter conditions compared to the employees. While the employees were asked for sureties of Rs 1 lakh each, Mishra and Sharma must furnish sureties of Rs 2 lakh each. They have also been ordered to surrender their passports to the investigating officer and are barred from leaving the country without the court's permission.

This development follows the bail granted to the employees in October 2025, where the court noted their limited role involved only receiving calls and encouraging purchases.