State of U.P v. Party

HON'BLE ASHUTOSH SRIVASTAVA, J. Heard Shri Anurag Mishra (through video conferencing) and Shri Prabhat Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Rajesh Kumar Singh, learned AGA for the State as also Shri Vineet Vikram, learned counsel for the first informant and perused the records. The instant bail application under Section 483 of BNSS at the instance of the applicant, Sannikant Kumar has been filed seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 6 of 2025, under Sections 318(4), 319(2), 111(2)(b) of BNS and Section 66-D of the Information Technology Act, Police Station Cyber Crime, District Prayagraj. The bail application of the applicant before the Court below was rejected by the learned Sessions Judge, Prayagraj, vide order dated 17.03.2025 and the applicant has been languishing in jail since 6.3.2025. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is entirely innocent and has been roped in this very case crime number for ulterior motives. The FIR giving rise to the case crime number in question was lodged on 13.02.2025 at 7:05 Hrs. with the allegation that the first informant is a Building Contractor and 2 BAIL No. 10626 of 2025 on 27.12.2024 he transferred a sum of Rs.10.40,687/- from his Bank A/c No. 0491110003024 maintained with Punjab National Bank, Jhansi in favour of Jindal Steel Company's A/c No. 110206551033, Code No. CNRB0018556 maintained with Canara Bank, Ghaziabad for purchasing construction material. Later on, it came to light that the Bank Account was fake and he had been subjected to cyber fraud. The applicant is not named in the FIR nor the Bank Account mentioned in the FIR belongs to the applicant. During investigation, it has been revealed that the Bank A/c No. 110206551033 maintained with Canara Bank belongs to one Vikas Kumar S/o Dular Chandra Manjhi. Investigation further reveals the said Vikas Kumar transferred a sum of Rs. 50,000/- from the said Bank Account to one Monu Kumar's Bank A/c No. 1969019006227338 and sum of Rs. 1,40,500/- to the Bank Account of Vikas Kumar, Raja Colony, Kanta Toli Ranchi, Jharkhand Bank A/c No. 1263019507386168 and another sum of Rs. 5,00,000/- to the Bank A/c No. 128950700001784 in the name of Rudra Kumar. The said Vikas Kumar is also stated to have purchased jewellery worth Rs. 2,80,203/- from Sagar Mal Jewelers, Bihar. Investigation further revealed that Jewellery worth Rs. 2,57,622/- was purchased from Kripashree Jewelers Tanishq on 27.12.2024 and two persons including the present applicant were seen purchasing the jewellery and the same was captured on CCTV. The other co-accused persons were arrested when they again visited the aforesaid jewellery shop located in Kankarbagh, Patna. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that name of applicant is Ajeet Kumar son of Kaushlendra Kumar and this fact is very well established from result of intermediate examination (Annexed as Annexure-2 of bail application) as well as copy of aadhar card, PAN Card (Annexed as Annexure-SA1 of supplementary affidavit). From the possession of the applicant two mobile phones including SIM cards and 04 ATM card was recovered, which belong to him. Learned counsel for the applicant has vehemently argued that the 3 BAIL No. 10626 of 2025 applicant has nothing to do with the incident in question, he is neither beneficiary of any transaction nor has purchased any jewellery from the amount misappropriated by cyber fraud. There is absolutely no evidence to implicate the applicant in the commission of the crime. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that charge sheet dated 10.4.2025 has already been filed before the Trial Court. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that amount in question were never received in the bank account of the applicant nor the amount was ever used by the applicant. The applicant has no criminal history and undertakes to cooperate with the trial. Hence bail is prayed for. Per contra, learned AGA as also Shri Vineet Vikram, learned counsel for the first informant have vehemently opposed the bail plea by submitting that complicity of applicant is very well established from the statement of co-accused Sanni Kant Kumar (annexed at Page 35 of supplementary affidavit), in which co- accused Sanni Kant Kumar has taken the name of applicant and submits that he has handed over the gold and cash to applicant Manish Kumar and also said that he used to talk with applicant on his mobile phone, being Mobile Phone No. 73197-10504. After fetching information from co-accused Sunni Kant Kumar, police machinery came into motion and on the basis of secret information, applicant was nabbed from Shahganj Wali Road, Prayagraj. When Investigation Officer inquired from his about mobile phone No. 73197-10504, applicant said that aforesaid mobile phone number is with him and he used that mobile number. Investigating Officer has also gone through the whatsapp chat of mobile number, in which several information regarding exchange of account number, login id, password, cash transaction were found. The charge sheet in this case has already been filed. If the applicant be released on bail, there is every possibility that applicant will tamper with the evidence. The applicant is permanent resident of State of Bihar and if enlarged on bail, he shall abscond and not cooperate with the trial. Hence prayer to reject the bail has been made. 4 BAIL No. 10626 of 2025 It is a settled law that while granting bail, the court has to keep in mind the nature of accusation, the nature of the evidence in support thereof, the severity of the punishment which conviction will entail, the character of the accused, the circumstances which are peculiar to the accused, his role and involvement in the offence, his involvement in other cases and reasonable apprehension of the witnesses being tampered with. This Court finds that in India, the rapid advancement of technology and the widespread adoption of digital infrastructure have led to a significant rise in cyber-crimes including phishing scams, ransomware attacks, cyber-stalking and data breaches. Initiatives like Digital India have accelerated the country's' digital transformation, but they have also exposed vulnerabilities that cyber-criminals exploit. Cyber-crime has been affecting the people across the nation, irrespective of religion, region, education or class. Newspapers, Magazines, You Tube Channels and Social Media are brimming with ordeals of an uncountable number of innocent victim of the cyber-crime, who are defrauded of their hard earned money. Such cyber-crimes are rampant in our society, and must be curbed. Cyber-crime in our country is like a silent virus stealthy, disruptive, and costing society more than just money, but trust, security and progress. In view of the above, the Court is not inclined to release the applicant on bail. The bail application is, accordingly, rejected. September 9, 2025 Ravi Prakash (Ashutosh Srivastava,J.) RAVI PRAKASH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

HON'BLE ASHUTOSH SRIVASTAVA, J. Heard Shri Anurag Mishra (through video conferencing) and Shri Prabhat Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Rajesh Kumar Singh, learned AGA for the State as also Shri Vineet Vikram, learned counsel for the first informant and perused the records. The instant bail application under Section 483 of BNSS at the instance of the applicant, Sannikant Kumar has been filed seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 6 of 2025, under Sections 318(4), 319(2), 111(2)(b) of BNS and Section 66-D of the Information Technology Act, Police Station Cyber Crime, District Prayagraj. The bail application of the applicant before the Court below was rejected by the learned Sessions Judge, Prayagraj, vide order dated 17.03.2025 and the applicant has been languishing in jail since 6.3.2025. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is entirely innocent and has been roped in this very case crime number for ulterior motives. The FIR giving rise to the case crime number in question was lodged on 13.02.2025 at 7:05 Hrs. with the allegation that the first informant is a Building Contractor and 2 BAIL No. 10626 of 2025 on 27.12.2024 he transferred a sum of Rs.10.40,687/- from his Bank A/c No. 0491110003024 maintained with Punjab National Bank, Jhansi in favour of Jindal Steel Company's A/c No. 110206551033, Code No. CNRB0018556 maintained with Canara Bank, Ghaziabad for purchasing construction material. Later on, it came to light that the Bank Account was fake and he had been subjected to cyber fraud. The applicant is not named in the FIR nor the Bank Account mentioned in the FIR belongs to the applicant. During investigation, it has been revealed that the Bank A/c No. 110206551033 maintained with Canara Bank belongs to one Vikas Kumar S/o Dular Chandra Manjhi. Investigation further reveals the said Vikas Kumar transferred a sum of Rs. 50,000/- from the said Bank Account to one Monu Kumar's Bank A/c No. 1969019006227338 and sum of Rs. 1,40,500/- to the Bank Account of Vikas Kumar, Raja Colony, Kanta Toli Ranchi, Jharkhand Bank A/c No. 1263019507386168 and another sum of Rs. 5,00,000/- to the Bank A/c No. 128950700001784 in the name of Rudra Kumar. The said Vikas Kumar is also stated to have purchased jewellery worth Rs. 2,80,203/- from Sagar Mal Jewelers, Bihar. Investigation further revealed that Jewellery worth Rs. 2,57,622/- was purchased from Kripashree Jewelers Tanishq on 27.12.2024 and two persons including the present applicant were seen purchasing the jewellery and the same was captured on CCTV. The other co-accused persons were arrested when they again visited the aforesaid jewellery shop located in Kankarbagh, Patna. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that name of applicant is Ajeet Kumar son of Kaushlendra Kumar and this fact is very well established from result of intermediate examination (Annexed as Annexure-2 of bail application) as well as copy of aadhar card, PAN Card (Annexed as Annexure-SA1 of supplementary affidavit). From the possession of the applicant two mobile phones including SIM cards and 04 ATM card was recovered, which belong to him. Learned counsel for the applicant has vehemently argued that the 3 BAIL No. 10626 of 2025 applicant has nothing to do with the incident in question, he is neither beneficiary of any transaction nor has purchased any jewellery from the amount misappropriated by cyber fraud. There is absolutely no evidence to implicate the applicant in the commission of the crime. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that charge sheet dated 10.4.2025 has already been filed before the Trial Court. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that amount in question were never received in the bank account of the applicant nor the amount was ever used by the applicant. The applicant has no criminal history and undertakes to cooperate with the trial. Hence bail is prayed for. Per contra, learned AGA as also Shri Vineet Vikram, learned counsel for the first informant have vehemently opposed the bail plea by submitting that complicity of applicant is very well established from the statement of co-accused Sanni Kant Kumar (annexed at Page 35 of supplementary affidavit), in which co- accused Sanni Kant Kumar has taken the name of applicant and submits that he has handed over the gold and cash to applicant Manish Kumar and also said that he used to talk with applicant on his mobile phone, being Mobile Phone No. 73197-10504. After fetching information from co-accused Sunni Kant Kumar, police machinery came into motion and on the basis of secret information, applicant was nabbed from Shahganj Wali Road, Prayagraj. When Investigation Officer inquired from his about mobile phone No. 73197-10504, applicant said that aforesaid mobile phone number is with him and he used that mobile number. Investigating Officer has also gone through the whatsapp chat of mobile number, in which several information regarding exchange of account number, login id, password, cash transaction were found. The charge sheet in this case has already been filed. If the applicant be released on bail, there is every possibility that applicant will tamper with the evidence. The applicant is permanent resident of State of Bihar and if enlarged on bail, he shall abscond and not cooperate with the trial. Hence prayer to reject the bail has been made. 4 BAIL No. 10626 of 2025 It is a settled law that while granting bail, the court has to keep in mind the nature of accusation, the nature of the evidence in support thereof, the severity of the punishment which conviction will entail, the character of the accused, the circumstances which are peculiar to the accused, his role and involvement in the offence, his involvement in other cases and reasonable apprehension of the witnesses being tampered with. This Court finds that in India, the rapid advancement of technology and the widespread adoption of digital infrastructure have led to a significant rise in cyber-crimes including phishing scams, ransomware attacks, cyber-stalking and data breaches. Initiatives like Digital India have accelerated the country's' digital transformation, but they have also exposed vulnerabilities that cyber-criminals exploit. Cyber-crime has been affecting the people across the nation, irrespective of religion, region, education or class. Newspapers, Magazines, You Tube Channels and Social Media are brimming with ordeals of an uncountable number of innocent victim of the cyber-crime, who are defrauded of their hard earned money. Such cyber-crimes are rampant in our society, and must be curbed. Cyber-crime in our country is like a silent virus stealthy, disruptive, and costing society more than just money, but trust, security and progress. In view of the above, the Court is not inclined to release the applicant on bail. The bail application is, accordingly, rejected. September 9, 2025 Ravi Prakash (Ashutosh Srivastava,J.) RAVI PRAKASH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad