Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:63932 Court No. - 68 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10183 of 2025 Applicant :- Shubham Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sr. Advocate,Vijit Saxena Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Ashutosh Srivastava,J. Heard Sri Gopal Swaroop Chaturvedi, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Vijit Saxena, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Shyam Narain Rai, learned AGA for the State Respondent and perused the record. The present bail application has been filed on behalf of applicant with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 70 of 2024 for offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B, 201 of the I.P.C. and Section 66/66-C of the Information Technology Act, registered at Police Station Cyber Crime Noida, District Gautam Buddh Nagar, during pendency of the trial. Brief facts of the case are that the FIR was lodged on 10.07.2024 against unknown persons. Initially the F.I.R. was lodged only uder Section 420 I.P.C. and Section 66-C of the Information Technology Act subsequently during the course of investigation Sections 467, 468, 471, 120-B, 201 of the I.P.C. and Section 66 of the Information Technology Act were also added. According to the FIR, the case of the prosecution is that by hacking the RTGS Channel of Nainital Bank and Reserve Bank of India, a fraud of Rs. 16,71,33,222.11 was made through 84 transactions. The said amount was transferred to various bank accounts between 16.06.2024 to 20.06.2024. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is a qualified chartered Account. He submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case with ulterior motive. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the FIR has been registered with some delay of which no satisfactory explanation has been given. He submits that the applicant is not named in the FIR and his name was surfaced during the course of investigation. The allegation against the applicant is that in connivance with the co-accused Harsh Bansal, the applicant hatched a criminal conspiracy and in connivance with the other co-accused, opened some fake firms in a planned manner and got current accounts opened in their names and got the server of the Nainital Bank hacked and transferred Rs. 99,80,500/- into them and withdrew the money into other bank accounts and divided the amount among themselves. It is further submitted that the Bank Account, in which the aforesaid transactions have been made, is not in the name of the applicant as such, the applicant has no connection in this crime. He submits that the applicant has not received any amount from the alleged transaction and is not a beneficiary thereof. The mobile number which was used for the aforesaid transaction is neither in the name of the applicant not the same is registered in the bank account. He has next argued that the applicant has no previous criminal history and on the basis of confessional statement, one case is registered against the applicant and if the applicant is released on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail. He is languishing in jail since 23.01.2025. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has supported the order passed by the Sessions Court and vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant and submits that the allegations involved are very serious in nature and the delay in lodging the F.I.R. cannot be said to be fatal to the case at this juncture while considering the application of bail. But he could not point out any material to the contrary. He, however, submits that in case the applicant is released on bail, he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail. He further submits that the applicant along with other accused opened two firms, Mahalaxmi Traders and Vivek Traders in a wrong manner. On 17.06.2024, in Nainital Bank online transactions of Rs. 3,60,94,020/- were made. The bank account was also shown to be of Bandhan Bank, which is the account of some Guddu Kapasiya, in which the mobile number of the accused was shown. It is also reflected in the investigation that the mobile numbers changed in the said account number of the said Bandhan Bank. All these SIM numbers were used in the same mobile. He further submits that there is also evidence against the accused applicant that the IEMI Number of the SIM Card used in the two banks i.e. IDFC and Bandhan Bank, in which the account was opened is in the name of Satyaraj Contractor and Vivek Traders is of the same mobile phone which belongs to the accused. Prima- facie, the involvement of the accused in the alleged crime cannot be denied. The crime is of serious in nature. It is a settled law that while granting bail, the court has to keep in mind the nature of accusation, the nature of the evidence in support thereof, the severity of the punishment which conviction will entail, the character of the accused, the circumstances which are peculiar to the accused, his role and involvement in the offence, his involvement in other cases and reasonable apprehension of the witnesses being tampered with. In the light of the facts and circumstances of the present case, it would be inappropriate to discuss the evidence in depth at this stage because it is likely to influence the trial of the accused. But, from the perusal of the evidences, collected during investigation so far, prima-facie, the involvement of the accused in the present case cannot be ruled out. No reason is found to falsely implicate the applicant/accused. Therefore, there is no good ground to release the applicant-accused on bail at this stage. All the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant pertain to the merits of the case and the same cannot be considered while considering application for grant of bail. This court is unable to form an opinion at this stage that the accused has not committed an offence. In the ultimate conclusion, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, gravity of the offence, severity of punishment, in my opinion, no case for bail is made out. Accordingly, the bail application is hereby rejected. It is clarified that the observations made regarding the bail application is limited to the decision of the bail application and any observations made herein shall not effect the trial of the case. Order Date :- 21.4.2025 pks Digitally signed by :- PAWAN KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad