In this criminal miscellaneous bail application, the Allahabad High Court rejected the bail plea of an applicant accused of fraud and forgery involving over Rs. 1 Crore. The bench found the applicant played a key role and was not entitled to bail.
Bail application rejected; applicant not entitled to be released on bail.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 38017 of 2025
Sri Chaman Singh Alias Chaitanya Chauhan
.....Applicant(s)
| Versus |
|---|
| State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) |
| Counsel for Applicant(s) : Shiv Kumar Gupta |
| Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. |
| Court No.- 68 |
HON'BLE ASHUTOSH SRIVASTAVA, J.
Heard Sri S. K. Gupta, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Yagavalkya Pandey, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
The present bail application has been filed on behalf of applicant under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 155 of 2025 for offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 472, 484, 475, 120-B of IPC and Section 66-D of Information Technology Act, registered at Police Station Sector 142, District Gautam Buddh Nagar, during pendency of the trial.
Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the accused-applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case crime number. He submits that the applicant was working in the Office of the informant's Company on the post of Consultant/CA. He further submits that the applicant/accused has no role in the present case. He submits that no funds have been transferred to the account of the applicant/accused. The informant company has no pending demand tax demands. The present case has been filed because the applicant/accused failed to meet the illegal money demands. The applicant is languishing in jail since 05.10.2025. He submits that there is no likelihood of his fleeing from course of justice or tampering with evidence in case of release on bail.
Per contra, learned AGA submits that FIR dated 05.08.2025 has been lodged against the applicant and and six other persons. It transpires from the record that the applicant/accused handled tax matters in the Company. He submits that at the request of applicant/ accused, the informant's company transferred funds to the accounts of other co-accused in lieu of VAT payments. Fake VAT deposit receipts from the Haryana and Gujarat Governments were sent to the informant's company through the applicant/accused email. He submits that a fund of Rs. 1 Crore has been committed in this case. The applicant is named in the FIR and investigation is still going on as such the applicant/accused is not entitled for any relief from this Court.
BAIL No. 38017 of 2025
2
Learned A.G.A. has further supported the order passed by the Sessions Court and vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant and submits that the allegations involved are very serious in nature. He, however, submits that in case the applicant is released on bail, he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.
Considering the above submissions raised by learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned AGA, the Court is of the opinion that the applicant is the accused of conspiring with co-accused to defraud the informant's company and fraudulently obtaining over Rs. 1 Crore from the informant company by preparing forged documents. The applicant/ accused is named in the FIR and is stated to have played a key role in the case. The informant company reportedly transferred funds to the accounts of accused Nos. 5 and 7 in exchange for invoice payments at the applicant/accused behest. It is admitted fact that the applicant is a Chartered Accountant and was handling the informant's company tax work. The applicant/accused submitted some invoices related to the payment of Haryana and Gujarat taxes to the informant company, which were found to be fraudulent upon audit. This case involves fraud, forgery and economic crimes. Accordingly, the applicant/accused is not entitled to released on bail.
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.
November 21, 2025 pks
(Ashutosh Srivastava,J.)
Digitally signed by :- PAWAN KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
3 issues framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to the applicant charged with fraud, forgery and economic crimes involving exceeding Rs. 1 Crore.
Whether the applicant, who played a key role as a Consultant/CA in preparing forged documents, is entitled to release on bail.
Whether the apprehension of further similar activities and misuse of bail liberty warrants rejection of the bail application.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Chaman Singh Alias Chaitanya Chauhan
Ashutosh Srivastava
As recorded by the court registry
2 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
