Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:95571 Court No. - 48 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 18798 of 2025 Applicant :- Anil Prajapati Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Arvind Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State and perused the record. 2. The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No. 0004 of 2022, under Sections 419, 420, 120B IPC and Sections 66/66D of I.T. Act, P.S.- Cyber Crime Police Thana, District- Jhansi, with the prayer to enlarge him on bail. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. In the first information report it was alleged that some persons have withdrawn some amount from ATM machine of Punjab National Bank by tampering the machine and by misusing ATM card. Applicant is not named in the first information report. It was stated that applicant was in jail since 04.09.2022 in District Jail Ayodhya and he was arrested in this case on the basis of B-warrant. Referring to facts of the matter, it was submitted that there is no credible evidence against applicant. The applicant is an illiterate person and his ATM card was used by his son. It is further submitted that similarly placed co-accused, namely, Chandrabhan, Jitendra Singh Yadav, Govind Das @ Gompal, Deep Narayan @ Gulu & Akeel have already been granted bail by Co-ordinate Benches of this Court. Criminal history of few cases shown against applicant has duly been explained. It was submitted that in case applicant is granted bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and would co-operate during trial. 4. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer of bail. However, it could not be disputed that similarly placed co-accused, namely, Chandrabhan, Jitendra Singh Yadav, Govind Das @ Gompal, Deep Narayan @ Gulu & Akeel have already been granted bail by Co- ordinate Benches of this Court 5. I have considered rival submissions and perused the record. 6. It is well settled that at pre-conviction stage, there is presumption of innocence. The object of keeping a person in custody is to ensure his availability to face the trial and to receive the sentence that may be passed. The detention is not supposed to be punitive or preventive. Seriousness of the allegation or the availability of material in support thereof are not the only considerations for declining bail. In this connection reference may be made to case of Vinod Bhandari Vs State of M.P. (2015) 11 Supreme Court Cases 502. 7. Considering submissions of learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusations, period of detention and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits, a case for bail is made out. According bail application is allowed. 8. Let the applicant Anil Prajapati, involved in aforesaid case crime, be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions: (i). The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (ii). The applicant shall not pressurize / intimidate the prosecution witness. (iii). The applicant shall appear before the Trial Court on the date fixed, unless his personal appearance is exempted. (iv). 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court. 9. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the Court concerned shall be at liberty to cancel bail of applicant in accordance with law. Order Date :- 5.6.2025 'SP'/- Digitally signed by :- SANDEEP PAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad