Raj Shantilal Patel Vs State of U.P.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1293 of 2026

¶3

Raj Shantilal Patel

¶4

.....Applicant(s)

¶5

Versus State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ajay Kumar Srivastava, Sayyed Kashif Abbas Rizvi Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

¶6

Court No. - 69

¶7

HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.

¶8

Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the applicant is taken on record.

¶9

Heard Shri Sayyed Kashif Abbas Rizvi along with Shri Ajay Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant, and Shri S.D.Shukla, learned AGA for the State-respondents and perused the record.

¶10

The present bail application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, has been filed on behalf of applicant, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.06 of 2024, under Sections 384, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B of I.P.C. and Sections 66-C, 66-D of I.T. Act, registered at Police Station Cyber Crime, District Sambhal, during pendency of the trial.

¶11

It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case due to ulterior motive. It is further submitted that the first information report has been lodged against unknown and the name of the applicant has surfaced during investigation only on the basis of the fact that the IMEI number of the mobile phone was used by the applicant and presently the said mobile phone was used by some other person. It is further submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 09.12.2025 and the applicant is having no criminal history, undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty, if granted. It has also been pointed out that in the wake of heavy pendency

¶12

BAIL No. 1293 of 2026

¶13

2

¶14

of cases in the Court, there is no likelihood of any early conclusion of trial.

¶15

Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant.

¶16

The first information report has been lodged against unknown and as per first information report, some cyber fraud is said to have been committed with the first informant and during investigation, the name of the applicant has surfaced only on the basis of the fact that IMEI number of the mobile phone, through which, the call was made to the first informant was used by the applicant long ago, however, the said mobile phone was currently being used by the co-accused Kaif Sheikh Saifi. It is further submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 09.12.2025 and the applicant is having no criminal history.

¶17

Upon considering the totality of facts, nature and the evidence reflected from record and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for bail. Hence, the present bail application is allowed.

¶18

Let the applicant- Raj Shantilal Patel involved in the aforesaid case crime shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned :-

¶19

(i) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any 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 to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶20

(ii) The applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses.

¶21

(iii) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of B.N.S.S.

¶22

(iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not

¶23

BAIL No. 1293 of 2026

¶24

3

¶25

seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in the trial court.

¶26

(v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel.

¶27

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

¶28

It is clarified that anything said in this order is limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The trial court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything said in this order.

¶29

(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)

¶30

May 7, 2026

¶31

RKM

¶32

Digitally signed by :- RAJESH KUMAR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Raj Shantilal Patel v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raj Shantilal Patel 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

Similar cases

Akram Vs State of U.P.

Akhil Pal Alias Atul Alias Sikandar Vs State of U.P.

Rohit @ Futta Kanjhan Vs State of U.P.

Nitin Yadav @ Kaluwa Vs State of U.P.

Sushma vs State of U.P.

Rahul Kori @ Musa @ Rajesh vs State of U.P.