HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 24353 of 2024 Court No. - 87 HON'BLE SANTOSH RAI, J. 1. Short counter affidavit filed by Shri Vikash Krishnamurti, learned counsel on behalf of the informant is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant; learned counsel for the informant; learned AGA for the State and perused the record. 3. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Shoeb Ansari Alias Saba Ansari, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 0009 of 2023, under Sections 419, 420, 34 I.P.C., 66C & 66D Information Technology Act, Police Station Cyber Crime, District Prayagraj, during pendency of trial. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that accused-applicant is not named in the FIR, his name came into light during the investigation on the basis of statement of co-accused Jiyaul Ansari. He further submits that amount of Rs.65,00,000/- is said to be taken by the accused-applicant by way of using credit card of the informant and committing fraud. He further submits that a mobile phone which was recovered during the course of investigation is not related to the accused-applicant and no any amount was sent or received in the account of the accused-applicant. In the FIR, mobile No.9310305155 is mentioned. During the course of investigation, the fact has not been discovered that who received the actual amount of Rs.67,00,000/-. He further submits that no specific role in committing the fraud against the informant. He further submits that accused-applicant has no criminal history and is languishing in Jail since 09.03.2024. In case, the Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Bijendra Kumar Tripathi, Lokesh Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Vikash Krishna Murti Shoeb Ansari Alias Saba Ansari .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 5. Per contra, learned counsel for the informant has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserve any indulgence. He further submits that fraud has been committed on the part of the accused- applicant and equal participation in committing the offence. He further submits that credit card was used by the accused-applicant and a phone received by the informant, thereafter, receiving some information from the informant, Rs.65,00,000/- was taken by the accused applicant fraudulently. 6. Learned AGA further submits that so called sim which was used in the offence was related to Chandani, who is the sister of the accused-applicant, Shoeb Ansari alias Saba Ansari, and location was traced out at the time of occurrence. He further submits that during the investigation, the chargesheet has already been filed, but the fact has not been clearly disclosed that what amount, accused-applicant received through his account or otherwise. In case, the applicant is released on bail he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail. 7. Having considered the submissions of the parties noted above, finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant; keeping in view uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial; applicant being under-trial having fundamental right to speedy trial; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, bail application is allowed. 8. Considering the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Manish Sisodia Vs. Directorate of Enforcement, 2024 LawSuit (SC) 677, considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, let the applicant involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions that :- (i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses. (ii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in Court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the BAIL No. 24353 of 2024 2 Trial Court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A I.P.C./269 B.N.S. (iv) In case the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C./84 B.N.S.S. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation then the Trial Court shall initiate proceedings against him in accordance with law under Section under Section 174-A I.P.C./209 B.N.S. (v) The applicant shall remain present in person before the Trial Court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C./351 B.N.S.S. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. 9. In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 10. Identity and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted. September 10, 2025 A.N. Mishra BAIL No. 24353 of 2024 3 (Santosh Rai,J.) Digitally signed by :- RADHIKA VISHWAKARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad