Akshay Soni vs State of U.P.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 2538 of 2026

Akshay Soni

	.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Kushagra Shahrukh	Srivastava,
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No.- 72

¶5

HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.

¶6

Heard Shri Sharukh, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Uma Shankar Mishra, A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶7

The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime no. 01 of 2024, under Section 420 of IPC and under Section 66-D of Information Technology Act, Police Station-Cyber Crime, District-Hapur, with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicant may be released on bail.

¶8

It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant was served a notice under Section 41-A Cr.P.C during the investigation. It is further submitted that in the present case, the charge-sheet has already been filed and the applicant is ready to cooperate in the trial proceedings. It is also submitted that the applicant is having no criminal history. It was also submitted that applicant undertakes to co-operate during trial and he would appear as and when required by the investigating agency or Court . It has been stated that in case, applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and will co-operate with the investigation and would obey all conditions of bail.

¶9

NABAIL No. 2538 of 2026

¶10

2

¶11

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has opposed the application for anticipatory bail.

¶12

It may be stated that in case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra, (2011) 1 SCC 694, it has been held by Hon'ble Supreme Court that while deciding anticipatory bail, Court must consider nature and gravity of accusation, antecedent of accused, possibility of accused to flee from justice and that Court must evaluate entire available material against the accused carefully and that the exact role of the accused has also to be taken into consideration.

¶13

In the instant case, considering the settled principle of law regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, role of applicant and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merits, a case for anticipatory bail is made out.

¶14

In the event of arrest of the applicant- Akshay Soni involved in the aforesaid case crime shall be released on interim anticipatory 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 till 15.04.226 with the following conditions:-

¶15

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence and that he would appear before the trial Court on the date fixed unless exempted by the Court concerned;

¶16

(ii) 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/her/them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

¶17

(iii) The applicant would co-operate during trial and would not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶18

(iv) The applicant shall not leave India without prior permission

¶19

NABAIL No. 2538 of 2026

¶20

3

¶21

of the Court concerned.

¶22

In default of any of the conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.

¶23

List this case as fresh on 15.04.2026 in top twenty cases.

¶24

Learned AGA is directed to obtain instructions by the date fixed.

¶25

March 17, 2026

¶26

Neetu

¶27

(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)

¶28

Digitally signed by :- NEETU SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Akshay Soni v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Akshay Soni 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

Juvenile C vs State of U.P. and Another

Juvenile X vs State of U.P. and Another

Amit Kumar vs State of U.P. and Another

X Juvenile vs State of U.P. and Another

Shah Alam vs State of U.P. and Another

Juvenile X vs State of U.P. and 3 Others