HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 32178 of 2025 Court No. - 67 HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J. 1. List has been revised. Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record. 2. Heard Sri Rajeev Sawhney, learned counsel for applicant as well as Sri Durgvijay Singh, learned Additional Advocate General assisted by Sri Sunil Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. 3. The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No.46 of 2025, under Sections 308(2), 319(2), 318(4), 336(3), 338, 340(2) B.N.S. and Sections 66, 66D of IT Act, Police Station- Cyber Crime, District- Gautam Buddh Nagar with the prayer to enlarge him on bail. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the FIR is delayed by more than six months and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. He has nothing to do with the said offence. The applicant is not named in the FIR. The alleged cyber fraud is stated to have been committed by the co- accused person Ankit Kumar as per FIR. The name of applicant has come up subsequently. The applicant himself has been duped of his hard earned money and he has lodged a complaint regarding online financial fraud with respect to internet banking fraud at Cyber Police Station Outer North, Delhi on 4.1.2025 at 08:11 a.m. i.e. one day after the commission of instant incident. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that even all the Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Rajeev Sawhney Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Sandeep .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) money of his account has been transferred from his account and only Rs.13.57/- was left over as balance amount in his account. The statement of the said account has been filed as Annexure-2 to the affidavit filed with bail application. As per the report filed by the Investigating Officer, which is a part of case diary dated 15.7.2025, the Investigating Officer has stated that the money has been transferred further from the account of accused persons and he is fetching the bank details of the said forwarding of amount. 6. It is further argued by learned counsel for the applicant that there is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is in jail since 17.6.2025 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 7. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that applicant is the main accused person, although he was not named in the FIR. The applicant is the proprietor of M/s NOVAFLARE TRADING OPC PRIVATE LIMITED at Vijay Nagar Colony, North West, Delhi, as such, he is the kingpin of said cyber fraud and is not entitled for bail. 8. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the fact that the applicant is the proprietor of said company, I do not find it a fit case for grant of bail to the applicant. The bail application is found devoid of merits and is, accordingly, rejected. 9. However, it is directed that the aforesaid case pending before the trial court be decided expeditiously in view of the principle as has been laid down in the recent judgments of the Supreme Court in the cases of Vinod Kumar vs. State of Punjab; 2015 (3) SCC 220 and Hussain and Another vs. Union of India; (2017) 5 SCC 702, if there is no legal impediment. 10. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial. September 19, 2025 Vikas Verma BAIL No. 32178 of 2025 2 (Krishan Pahal,J.) Digitally signed by :- VIKAS VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad