Abhay Verma Vs State of U.P.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 36772 of 2025

Abhay Verma

	Versus .....Applicant(s)
State of U.P.	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Sakshi Jaiswal, Vimal Kumar Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

¶5

Court No. - 64

¶6

HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Shashanka Shekhar Pandey, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶8

The present bail application has been filed with a prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 147 of 2025, under Sections 111(2)(B), 318(4), 61(2) B.N.S., and 66C of the Information Technology Act, Police Station- Cyber Crime, District- Agra during pendency of the trial.

¶9

Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant has no concern with the bank account of the nephew of the informant namely, Sahil. There is no monetary transaction between the applicant and Sahil. The ATM card of Sahil was not used by the applicant. The applicant is not a beneficiary of any illegal transaction. The statement of bank account of Sahil has not been collected by the investigating officer. The investigation has been completed and charge-sheet has been filed. It is next contended that the applicant is not a member of any organized crime syndicate nor he acted on behalf of such syndicate. The applicant is in jail since 3.8.2025 having no criminal history. In case, he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

¶11

Having heard counsel for the parties and having perused the record, this Court prima facie finds that the statement of bank account of Sahil has not

¶12

BAIL No. 36772 of 2025

¶13

2

¶14

been collected by the investigating officer. At this stage, there is no substantive evidence to link the applicant with the offence. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. Further the applicant has presently remained confined for more than two months and there is no hope of early conclusion of trial, more so when no reasonable apprehension has been brought to the fore by the State that the applicant, if enlarged on bail, would either tamper with the evidence or intimidate the witness, without commenting on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶15

Let the applicant, Abhay Verma involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned on the following conditions that:

¶16

i. the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;

¶17