The Supreme Court on January 12, 2026, granted anticipatory bail to the directors of a Mumbai-based firm accused in a major illegal call routing case involving alleged revenue loss of over ₹5 crore to the government. The Court observed that custodial interrogation was no longer necessary since the accused had cooperated with the investigation.
Background of the Case
The case arose from FIR No. 350 of 2024 registered by the Rabale MIDC Police Station in Navi Mumbai. The FIR alleged violations under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, the Indian Wireless Act, 1933, and the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885.
Read also:- Father Living With Second Woman Can’t Seek Child Custody: Chhattisgarh HC Upholds Family Court Order
According to the prosecution, between April and July 2024, the Department of Telecommunications received multiple complaints that international calls were appearing on Indian mobile phones as local calls. Investigations revealed that these calls were being illegally routed using Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) technology - a method commonly referred to as “grey routing.”
The authorities alleged that M/s Humanity Path Private Limited, along with technical partners including M/s Web Werks and M/s Srivansh Consulting Private Limited, had set up infrastructure using over 1,000 numbers to mask international calls as domestic ones. This allegedly caused a revenue loss exceeding ₹5 crore to the public exchequer.
The appellants, directors of M/s Srivansh Consulting Private Limited, were accused of managing and operating the technical setup used for the illegal routing.
Court Observations
A Bench comprising Justice Aravind Kumar and Justice Prasanna B. Varale noted that the appellants had already been granted interim protection earlier and had complied with all directions of the investigating agency.
“The appellants have appeared before the Investigating Officer, cooperated with the investigation and furnished their statements,” the Court observed.
The State had argued that custodial interrogation was still necessary to uncover a larger conspiracy and misuse of telecom infrastructure. However, the Bench was not convinced.
The Court noted that no fresh material had been placed on record to justify custodial interrogation after the appellants had already joined the investigation.
“Nothing further has been shown to demonstrate that any fresh material has been unearthed which would justify denial of bail,” the Bench remarked.
Read also:- No Pension After Two Decades of Absence: Rajasthan High Court Rejects Claim, Flags Missing Service Files
Decision of the Court
Allowing the appeals, the Supreme Court made the interim protection absolute and granted anticipatory bail to the accused directors.
The Court clarified that:
- The appellants must cooperate with the investigation whenever called.
- If they fail to do so, the State is free to seek cancellation of bail.
- Any such request must be considered by the trial court on its own merits after hearing the accused.
With these observations, the criminal appeals were disposed of, and all pending applications were closed.
Case Title: Pinky Rani & Ors. vs State of Maharashtra
Case No.: Criminal Appeal arising out of SLP (Crl.) Nos. 16470–16471 of 2025
Decision Date: January 12, 2026
