Hari Om Sahu Vs State of U.P.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:133012

Court No. - 87

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 22815 of 2025

Applicant :- Hari Om Sahu Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mazhar Ullah Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Avnish Saxena,J.

¶6

Learned A.G.A. has filed counter affidavit today in the Court, which is taken on record.

¶7

The present bail application has been moved by the applicantaccused Hari Om Sahu for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 319(2) of B.N.S. and Section 66-C and 66-D I.T. Act in Case Crime No. 17 of 2025, Police Station- Cyber Crime, DistrictPrayagraj.

¶8

Sri Mazhar Ullah, learned advocate, appears on behalf of applicant and submits that the accused applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case wherein FIR has been registered by one Ghanshyam Yadav of Cybercell, where certain complaints have reached the Cybercell that through a facebook account a fraud has been committed on account of Railway reservation. The accused is an illiterate person. It is mentioned in the supplementary affidavit that his account has been hacked and he has been falsely implicated in the present case and he is in jail Since May, 2025. No incriminating article has been recovered from his possession. The possession of mobile phone and other gadgets has been made in absence of independent witness.

¶9

Per contra, learned AGA opposed the bail and submits that there is forensic evidence against the accused. The mobile phone has been recovered from him. The accused is indulged in Cybercell. There is criminal history of two cases against the applicant.

¶10

Countering the argument of criminal history, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the criminal history of two cases has been explained in the bail application as well as supplementary affidavit.

¶11

This Court has taken into consideration the rival submissions made by the parties and perused the record.

¶12

The record, prima facie, reveals that the FIR has been registered on 16.05.2025 by the Incharge of Cybercell, whereby a facebook account and the mobile phone on which a facebook account is being run was found to be of accused. The recovery has been made in absence of the independent witness. The investigation is continuing. It is nowhere reveal that the investigation has been done on the point of the mobile phone or facebook I.D. of accused is being hacked The digital forensic evidence has not been collected so far. The applicant is in jail since May, 2025.

¶13

Without touching the merit of the case, this bail application is allowed.

¶14

The accused/applicant 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 court concerned in view of observation made by the Supreme Court in its dictums of Girish Gandhi Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh [(2024) 10 SCC 674] and Policy Strategy for grant of bail in re [(2024)10SCC 685].

¶15

The accused-applicant shall cooperate in judicial process for fair and speedy disposal.

¶16

Order Date :- 6.8.2025 Mini

¶17

(Avnish Saxena,J.)

¶18

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

Hari Om Sahu v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hari Om Sahu 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases