HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8838 of 2025 Court No. - 13 HON'BLE SUBHASH VIDYARTHI, J. 1. Supplementary affidavit filed by the learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record. 2. Heard Sri Nadeem Murtaza, the learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri Mayank Sinha, the learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 3. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.118 of 2025, under Sections 318(4), 319(2), 351(4), 317(2), 61(2)b B.N.S and Section 66-D of Information Technology Act, registered at Police Station Cyber Crime, District Lucknow. 4. The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of F.I.R. lodged on 18.07.2025 stating that some unknown accused persons digitally arrested the complainant, who is a 73 years old woman and extracted Rs. 56 lakhs from her. 5. The police claimed to have arrested one Chitransh Kunwar and the applicant was accompanying the aforesaid co-accused person at the time of his arrest and, therefore, the applicant has also been arrested. Rs. 900/- are said to have been recovered from the applicant and no incriminating material has been recovered from him. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Nadeem Murtaza, Bhupendra Singh Bisht, Pallav Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Mohd. Zaid .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. .....Opposite Party(s) 6. A co-accused person Mohammad Shameem Ansari, was granted stay on his arrest by means of an order dated 05.08.2025 passed by a Division Bench of this Court in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 7081 of 2025. 7. In the affidavit filed in support of the bail application, it has been stated that the applicant is an innocent person, he has been falsely implicated in the present case and he has no criminal history. 8. The learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail application and he has submitted that the investigation in the matter is still going on. However, on the basis of material provided to him, he stated that the applicant has been arrested because he was accompanying co-accused Chitransh Kunwar at the time of his arrest and that merely Rs. 900/- have been recovered from him. He has further stated that till this time, no other material has come to light against the applicant. 9. Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that the aforesaid facts are sufficient for making out a case for enlargement of the applicant on bail. 10. Accordingly, this bail application stands allowed. 11. Let the applicant- Mohd. Zaid be released on bail in aforementioned case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Magistrate/Court concerned, subject to the following conditions: - (i) the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; (ii) the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses; (iii) the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court. September 16, 2025 Preeti. BAIL No. 8838 of 2025 2 (Subhash Vidyarthi,J.) Digitally signed by :- PREETI GAUTAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench