Sunil Mishra vs State of U.P.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 16349 of 2026

Sunil Mishra

.....Applicant(s)

	Versus
State of U.P.	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Daya Shanker Pandey, Prachi Tripathi
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

¶5

Court No. - 69

¶6

HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.

¶7

Heard Shri Daya Shanker Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant, and Shri Ashish Kumar Tripathi, learned AGA for the State-respondents and perused the record.

¶8

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.46 of 2026, under Sections 3(5), 318(4), 336(3), 338, 340(2) of B.N.S. and Section 66-D of I.T. Act, registered at Police Station Cyber Crime, District Ghaziabad, during pendency of the trial.

¶9

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 co-accused Pawan Kumar Yadav and Jitendra Kumar have already been granted bail by this Court vide orders dated 07.05.2026 and 07.05.2026 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos.15450 of 2026 and 15516 of 2026. It is further submitted that as per first information report, mobile phones, ATM Cards and SIM cards are said to have been recovered from the possession of the applicant and four other coaccused and they are said to have confessed that they indulged in cyber fraud, however, no individual has lodged complaint against the applicant. It is further submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 13.03.2026, undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty, if granted. It has also been pointed out that in the wake of heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is no likelihood of any early conclusion of trial.

¶10

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

¶11

BAIL No. 16349 of 2026

¶12

2

¶13

Co-accused Pawan Kumar Yadav and Jitendra Kumar have already been granted bail by this Court vide orders dated 07.05.2026 and 07.05.2026 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos.15450 of 2026 and 15516 of 2026. As per first information report, mobile phones, ATM Cards and SIM cards are said to have been recovered from the possession of the applicant and four other co-accused and they are said to have confessed that they indulged in cyber fraud, however, no individual has lodged complaint against the applicant. It is further submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 13.03.2026.

¶14

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.

¶15

Let the applicant- Sunil Mishra 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 :-

¶16

(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.

¶17

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

¶18

(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.

¶19

(iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in the trial court.

¶20

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

¶21

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

¶22

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

¶23

BAIL No. 16349 of 2026

¶24

3

¶25

to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything said in this order.

¶26

May 14, 2026 RKM

¶27

(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)

¶28

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

Sunil Mishra v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sunil Mishra 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

Javed Vs State of U.P.

Pinki Vs State of U.P.

Akram Vs State of U.P.

Ravishankar vs State of U.P.

Rajan Tiwari @ Vishwajeet Tiwari vs State of U.P.

Iftikhar Ali vs State of U.P.