Jai Singh vs State of U.P.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:13651

Court No. - 66

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1590 of 2025

Applicant :- Jai Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Rajesh Dwivedi, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Shatrughan Yadav, learned AGA for the State-respondent.

¶7

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 203 of 2024, under Sections 319(2), 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340 of BNS and 66-C, 66 D I.T. Act, Police Station Raniya, District Kanpur Dehat, during pendency of the trial in the court below.

¶8

FIR of the present case was lodged against the applicant and three others by the police personnel and according to the FIR, applicant and co-accused Monu were arrested and from the possession of the applicant Rs. Five thousand were recovered and from the possession of co-accused Monu Rs. Twenty thousand were recovered and they indulged in the commission of cyber crime.

¶9

It is further mentioned in the FIR that from the possession of the applicant and co-accused adhar cards and other fake documents related to bank were also recovered.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that on the basis of false allegations, applicant has been made accused in the present matter and except the bald and verbal allegation that applicant indulged in cyber crime there is no cogent evidence in this regard against him.

¶11

He further submitted that applicant is having no criminal history and all the alleged offences are triable by Magistrate and in the present matter, applicant is in jail since 11.10.2024.

¶12

Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail but could

¶13

not dispute the arguments on facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicant.

¶14

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.

¶15

However, as per allegation applicant and other accused persons indulged in commission of cyber crime but it reflects that in this regard there is no cogent evidence against them on record including applicant.

¶16

Further, all the alleged offences are triable by Magistrate and in the present matter, applicant is in jail since 11.10.2024.

¶17

Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶18

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed .

¶19

Let the applicant- Jai Singh, be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶20

(i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted.

¶21

(ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶22

(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity.

¶23

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant.

¶24

It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial.

¶25

Order Date :- 27.1.2025/Ankita

¶26

Digitally signed by :- ANKITA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Jai Singh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jai Singh 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

Sonu vs State of U.P. and Another

Farookh @ Gurjar vs State of U.P.

Shivam vs State of U.P.

Mohit vs State of U.P.

Akram Shekh Alias Akku vs State of U.P.

Nandu Alias Anand vs State of U.P.