Ashvini Pal vs State of U.P.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:86139

Court No. - 88

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1402 of 2025

Applicant :- Ashvini Pal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vijay Kumar Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra,J.

¶6

Rejoinder affidavit filed today is taken on record.

¶7

Heard Sri Vijay Kumar Dwivedi, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State-respondent and perused the material available on record.

¶8

By means of this bail application the applicant has prayed to be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 136 of 2024, under Sections 319(2), 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 3(5) B.N.S. and Section 66-D I.T. Act, at Police Station Cyber Crime, District Agra.

¶9

As per prosecution version, informant namely Vinay Sharma lodged the FIR on 04.10.2024 with an averments that the a cyber fraud has been committed with the victim by some unknown persons. The victim was connected via whatsApp by unknown persons, who invited them to join a new group on the platform. In this group, the fraudsters presented an IPO offer for a company named Manba. The victim agreed to the offer based on the fraudulent assurances provided. The fraudsters shared a link on whatsApp, asking the victim to download an application that was required to process the IPO allotment. This application was not listed on the Google play store and the victim download it from a third party link. After downloading the application, the victim was asked to complete the KYC process with in the App. Once the KYC process was completed, the fraudsters asked the victim to deposit money into various accounts shown in the application, with the account number changing after every deposit. The victim deposited a total amount of 18.5 lacs. It

¶10

was reflected in the application. The victim tried to withdraw the money.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the police investigated the case and collected the money deposited by the victim/informant in various account provided by unknown fraudsters. During investigation, applicant and co-accused arrested were arrested by the police on 09.12,2024. The name of the applicant surfaced in the statement of coaccused persons namely Akbar, Ravi Kumar and Imran. From their possession, nine mobile phones, one laptop, two sims, 18 debit and credit cards, cheque books and pan card were allegedly recovered. He further submitted that there is no evidence on record that any amount deposited by the informant at the instance of fraudsters was transferred into the account of the applicant. The applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. The investigating officer has described the result of investigation in CD-19 dated 19.02.2025 shows that the amount deposited by the informant in various accounts as a result of fraud played upon him by the receiver in the account of Akbar, Ravi Kumar and Imran. The amount was initially transferred in the account no.49100104930 by using forged documents in Cosmos Cooperative Bank Limited from SBI account of the informant and for that reason Sections 338, 336(3), 340(2), 319(2), 318(4) and Section 3(5) of B.N.S. were added. Investigating Officer has stated that the charge sheet has been submitted against the applicant and co-accused persons. He is not having any prior criminal history. He undertakes to abide by the conditions of bail, if he is granted bail. Applicant is in jail since 01.12.2024.

¶12

Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the informant has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.

¶13

In light of the foregoing discussions and considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the nature of offence, evidence, complicity of accused and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶14

Let the applicant- Ashvini Pal be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to

¶15

the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified

¶16

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in Court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶17

(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A IPC.

¶18

(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C., may be issued and if applicant fails to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the Trial Court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A IPC.

¶19

(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶20

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶21

Order Date :- 21.5.2025 Mini

¶22

Digitally signed by :- MINI KANAUJIYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ashvini Pal v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashvini Pal v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Raja @ Julfekar Ahmad vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 3 Others

Mrs. Suraiya Naj and Another vs Mohammad Imamuddin Khan

Munnu Kushwaha vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Prabhu vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Mohd. Arif vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another

Santosh Kumar vs State of U.P. Thur. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko and 2 Others