HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 33127 of 2025 Court No. - 67 HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard learned counsel for applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. 3. The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No.70 of 2024, under Section 318(4) B.N.S. and 66D I.T. Act, Police Station Cyber Crime, District Saharanpur with the prayer to enlarge him on bail. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the FIR was instituted regarding cyber fraud to the tune of Rs.36,44,000/-. The applicant has nothing to do with the said offence. He has been falsely implicated in the present case subsequently on the basis of transactions in his account to the tune of Rs.3,25,000/-. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that the applicant, as a bona fide act, had moved an application before cyber crime department on 12.12.2024 indicating that his account was misused by the co-accused persons stating that the applicant wanted to get the loan sanctioned and for it, he had to show the transactions of heavy amount of money, as such, the applicant himself has been defrauded by the co-accused persons. The applicant is in jail since 22.08.2025 and is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 6. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Avinash Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Gunasekaran Govindhasami .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) 7. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the fact that Rs.3.25 lakhs has been transferred to the account of the applicant, I do not find it a fit case for grant of bail to the applicant. The bail application is found devoid of merits and is, accordingly, rejected. 8. However, it is directed that the aforesaid case pending before the trial court be decided expeditiously as early as possible in view of the principle as has been laid down in the recent judgments of the Supreme Court in the cases of Vinod Kumar vs. State of Punjab; 2015 (3) SCC 220 and Hussain and Another vs. Union of India; (2017) 5 SCC 702, if there is no legal impediment. 9. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial. September 25, 2025 (Ravi Kant) BAIL No. 33127 of 2025 2 (Krishan Pahal,J.) Digitally signed by :- SUMIT SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad