[2026:RJ-JP:739] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal 2nd Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 15872/2025 Uppalapuvu Vinay Kumar Son Of Mohanrao Uppalapuvu, Aged About 23 Years, Resident Of Kk-5, Ff-6, Vambe Colony, Azit Dingh Nager, Vijaywada (Urban), Po. Azit Nagar, District Krishna (Andhra Pradesh) (At Present Confined In Central Jail Jaipur) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Girish Khandelwal For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vijay Singh Yadav, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN Order 08/01/2026 1. The present bail application under Section 483 of BNSS is filed by the applicant-accused Uppalapuvu Vinay Kumar Son Of Mohanrao Uppalapuvu seeking bail in respect of a criminal case registered as FIR No.389/2024 dated 17.11.2024 registered at P.S. Special Crime and Cyber Crime Commissionerate, Jaipur, for the offence under Sections 318(4), 319(2), 316(2), 61(2)(b) of BNS and Sections 66C and 66D of IT Act. 2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the matter and the investigation against him is complete and he is no more required in investigation. He further submits that there are no chance of fleeing of applicant accused from the jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court. He also submits that the [2026:RJ-JP:739] (2 of 5) [CRLMB-15872/2025] applicant undertakes not to repeat offence and cooperate with investigation/trial, which will take time. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that first bail application of present petitioner was dismissed by this Court on 11.06.2025 and now charge-sheet has been filed. He further submitted that present petitioner is in custody since his arrest on 25.03.2025 and investigation clearly indicated that present petitioner has nothing to do with act of cheating or cyber crime. He also submitted that the credentials and documents of present petitioner indicated that main accused is Pallivenkata and other persons and not the present petitioner. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail application and submitted that the allegations are grave and serious in nature. He has also filed a report received from concerned Police Station. 5. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner-accused and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material placed on record by both the parties. 6. The first bail application of present petitioner was considered by this Court on 11.06.2025 and after considering the first bail application, this court has dismissed the bail application of present petitioner and Rajkumar wherein we have observed as under: 8. On the basis of report filed by Rakesh Verma on 17..11.2024, about fraud and cheating by Cyber Crime on S.M.C. site, F.I.R. was registered and police has investigated the case. During [2026:RJ-JP:739] (3 of 5) [CRLMB-15872/2025] investigation, police has found that internet source to commit crime was used in Cambodia and the money was transferred to local bank accounts in the name of different persons but within India. The police has found that ₹10,00,000/- was transacted in bank account of applicant-accused Rajkumar (present petitioner), thereafter, a charge-sheet has been filed against the applicant-accused Rajkumar & others and kept pending against others. During further investigation, it was found that current account in the name of PVR Aqua Entreprises was opened in Katholic Seriyan Bank, with 70 per cent partnership of Palli Venkata Ramanujaneyulu and 30 per cent of Uppalapuvu Vinay Kumar S/o Mohanrao Uppalapuvu. The police has found that there is a total transaction of ₹1,42,80,427.60/- in the current account, jointly operated by present applicant-accused Uppalapuvu Vinay Kumar S/o Mohanrao Uppalapuvu and Pallivenkata. After Investigation, police has filed charge-sheet against this applicant-accused as well. 9. A persual of record indicate that there is one more case against the applicant-accused Uppalapuvu Vinay Kumar S/o Mohanrao Uppalapuvu and that relates to assault but there is no criminal antecedents against the applicant- accused Rajkumar. The material on record clearly suggested that the account of applicant-accused [2026:RJ-JP:739] (4 of 5) [CRLMB-15872/2025] Rajkumar, was used for the purpose of receiving money from bank account of victim. The applicant- accused has claimed that he worked as a facilitator. The interrogation note clearly suggest that this applicant is having more bank accounts and same were used for similar purposes. It reveals that in S.B.I. account 244.5 lacs were transacted whereas in two bank account of UCO Bank were used to transact ₹6.16 crore. There is one more account in Canara Bank, which was also used. It indicate involvement of applicant-accused Rajkumar in a big manner, may be as facilitator. 10. The evidence against other accused Uppalapuvu Vinay Kumar S/o Mohanrao Uppalapuvu, clearly suggest that he was a partner in a firm having current account and same was used for transacting the money cheated from complainant or other persons. 11. Having considered the nature of crime and interstate involvement include use of I.P. addresses of other countries it is necessary that these types of cases be investigated by Senior Officer having adequate knowledge Cyber Crime and also economic offences. The matter is triable by magistrate First Class but I am of considered view that in the instant case, looking to role and involvement of both the applicants-accused, they are not entitled to be released on bail. [2026:RJ-JP:739] (5 of 5) [CRLMB-15872/2025] 7. The report submitted by police indicated that main accused Pallivenkata was arrested on 11.07.2025 and currently he has been sent to judicial custody. The grounds as considered by this Court clearly indicated that present petitioner was one of the partner of the firm which committed cyber crime. 8. The facts and the material indicate that the alleged offence are of serious nature and role attributed to applicant is prima facie sufficient to consider complicity of applicant in the crime. Therefore, at this juncture, considering the evidence collected so far, this is not a fit case to enlarge the applicant accused on bail. 9. Considering the gravity of allegations and overall facts and circumstances of the case, it is appropriate to dismiss the bail application of the applicant accused at this stage. 10. Accordingly, the application for bail filed under Section 483 of BNSS preferred by Uppalapuvu Vinay Kumar Son Of Mohanrao Uppalapuvu is hereby dismissed. (ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J PREETI VALECHA /06