2025:UHC:4885 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS BA1 No. 828 of 2025 Hon’ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. Bhuvnesh Joshi, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. Siddhartha Bisht and Mr. N.S. Kanyal, learned AGA for the State. 3. Mr. Rishab Ranghar, learned counsel for the informant. 4. Present applicant–Manoj Jaiswal S/o Shri Ram Sagar, is seeking bail in relation to first information report dated 19.10.2024 bearing FIR No. 0076 of 2024, Police Station Cyber PS, District Dehradun, which, in fact, was lodged against some unknown persons for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 120-B IPC read with Section 66(D) of the Information Technology Act. 5. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the present applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated and though the investigation is still going on, however, in respect of the present applicant, the charge-sheet has already been filed. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the present applicant has no previous criminal history and since the charge-sheet has already been filed, there is no need of custodial interrogation of the present applicant. Apart from this, learned counsel for the applicant submits that no amount was credited into the account of the present applicant and whatever be the amount was credited, the same was credited in the account of one Sanjeev Singh. He also submits that the present applicant has no nexus with 2025:UHC:4885 Sanjeev Singh and Sanjeev Singh has not yet been arrested. 7. On the other side, learned counsel for the complainant as well as learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed the bail application and submits that the applicant is the person, from whose possession, at about 16 Nos. of SIMS, two GSM land lines and eight boxes of GSM land lines were recovered. He also submits that the mobiles, which was having by the applicant, contained all the messages of the transactions. He submits that it is an organized crime, organized by the persons living in different parts of the country and the complainant, who is the victim, has been cheated by them. 8. After hearing the arguments of learned counsel for the applicant, the counsel for the State as well as the counsel for the complainant and on perusal of the FIR, and other documents placed on record including the counter-affidavit, in which the statement of the SI Kuldeep Tamta, the Statement of the constable Sohan Badoni and the constable Subham Chaudhary have been enclosed, it reveals that the present applicant is involved in an organized crime, which is apparently a very serious issue for the society, and the investigation against the rest of the accused is still going on and if at this stage, the applicant is enlarged on bail, there may be possibility that the applicant, in any manner, may influence the investigation, therefore, this Court is of the view that the applicant is not entitled for bail. 9. Accordingly, the bail application is rejected. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 12.06.2025 R.Bisht 2025:UHC:4885