Advocates:
['SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI', '', 'VIRENDRA SINGH', 'G A']

Court No. - 76

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 15381 of 2022

Applicant :- Mubarak Ansari

Opposite Party :- State of U.P.

Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi,Virendra Singh

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and

learned A.G.A.

The instant bail application has been 昀椀led on

behalf of the applicant, Mubarak Ansari, with a

prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.

469 of 2021, under Sections 419,420,120-B IPC

and section 66C,66D Information Technology

Act,2008 Police Station Cyber Crime Bareilly,

District- Bareilly, during pendency of trial.

With regard to o昀昀ence of online fraud, the First

Information Report was lodged against unknown

accused persons.Learned counsel for the applicant

has submitted that applicant was not named in the

First Information Report.The investigating o昀케cer

search

to

mobile

numbers

in

www.cycaps.tspolice.gov then found that one

case is registered on mobile no. 7754913034 and

after checking Irfan Ansari's name came in light

who was arrested in case crime no.87 of 2021

under sections 419,420,467,468,471,120-B I.P.c.

and sections 66B,66C,66D,84C I.T. Act and in this

case co-accused, Mubarak Ansari & Mohammad

Sabbir are also involved and both were arrested by

the police.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that

applicant has been arrested on the on the

statement of the co-accused,Irfan Ansari, who

stated that his phone was used by the applicant

which is false. The applicant is in jail since

2.2.2022 and has no criminal history.

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the

applicant but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.

Keeping in view the nature of the o昀昀ence,

argument advanced on behalf of the parties,

evidence on record regarding complicity of the

accused, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the

Constitution of India and the dictum of Apex Court

in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P.

and another reported in (2018)3 SCC 22 and

without expressing any opinion on the merits of

the case, the Court is of the view that the

applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail

application is allowed.

Let the applicant be released on bail on his

furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each

in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court

concerned subject to following conditions. Further,

before issuing the release order, the sureties be

veri昀椀ed.

1. The applicant shall not tamper with the

prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing

the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.

2. The applicant shall cooperate in the trial

sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

3. The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal

activity or commission of any crime after being

released on bail.

4. That 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 him from disclosing

such facts to the Court or to any police o昀케cer;

5. The applicant shall 昀椀le an undertaking to the

e昀昀ect that he shall not seek any adjournment on

the dates 昀椀xed for evidence and the witnesses are

present in court. In case of default of this

condition, it shall be open for the trial court to

treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders

in accordance with law to ensure presence of the

applicant.

6. The applicant shall remain present, in person,

before the trial court on the dates 昀椀xed for (i)

opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii)

recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If

in the opinion of the trial court default of this

condition is deliberate or without su昀케cient cause,

then it shall be open for the trial court to treat

such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and

proceed against him in acc