Deepak Vs State of U.P.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 38919 of 2025

Deepak

	Versus	.....Applicant(s)
State of U.P.		.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)		: Amit Kumar
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)		: G.A.

¶5

Court No. - 69

¶6

HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.

¶7

1. Heard Sri Amit Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri B.P. Singh, learned AGA for the State-respondents and perused the record.

¶8

2. 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. 120 of 2025, under Sections 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 3(5) BNS and Section 66-D of IT Act, registered at Police Station Cyber Crime, District Ghaziabad, during pendency of the trial.

¶9

3. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case and he has been languishing in jail since 27.6.2025. It is further submitted that the it is alleged in the First Information Report that the police, on the basis of confidential information, apprehended three persons and recovered certain passbooks, ATM cards and electronic gadgets from their possession. The arrested accused persons allegedly confessed their involvement in cyber fraud. The name of the present applicant surfaced only in the confessional statement of co-accused Aman Agarwal and he was subsequently arrested. It is further submitted that co-accused Garvit Tyagi has already been granted bail vide order dated 23.03.2026 passed in Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 44577 of 2025. He has a criminal history of one case, which has been duly explained in the supplementary affidavit dated 09.12.2025. It is also submitted that the

¶10

BAIL No. 38919 of 2025

¶11

2

¶12

applicant 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.

¶13

4. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant and submitted that during the course of investigation, it has emerged that the applicant, along with co-accused persons, was involved in cheating and that certain screenshots indicating transfer of money from one account to another have been attributed to him.

¶14

5. As per allegations in the FIR, the initial arrest and recovery were made from co-accused Raman Agarwal, Rahul Sharma and Rahul Yadav, from whose possession passbooks, ATM cards, and electronic gadgets were recovered. The implication of the applicant is based solely on the confessional statement of co-accused Aman Agarwal. Moreover, no complaint from any private individual alleging cheating or cyber fraud against the applicant has been brought on record.

¶15

6. 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 .

¶16

7 . Let the applicant- Deepak involved in the aforesaid case crime 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 with the following conditions :-

¶17

(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.

¶18

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

¶19

(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)

¶20

BAIL No. 38919 of 2025

¶21

3

¶22

recording of statement under Section 351 of B.N.S.S.

¶23

(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.

¶24

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

¶25

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

¶26

9. 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.

¶27

(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)

¶28

April 2, 2026 KJ

¶29

Digitally signed by :- KAMARJAHAN ANSARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Deepak v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Deepak 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

Similar cases

Mohan vs State of U.P.

Rahul Kumar vs State of U.P.

Nitesh Gupta Alias Golu vs State of U.P.

Anand Hudda vs State of U.P.

Annu @ Anup vs State of U.P.

Abhishek Gond vs State of U.P.