Allahabad High Court

FAIZANversusSTATE OF U.P.

Decided: 7 September 2026
Bench: KRISHAN PAHAL

Holding

The court held that the applicant is entitled to bail.

Summary

Faizan was arrested in connection with a cyber‑crime case involving alleged transfer of Rs.9 lakhs and charged under Sections 318(4), 336(3), 340(2), 338 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 66D of the Information Technology Act. He had been in custody since 10 April 2025, amounting to more than one year and five months, while the trial had not progressed – the charge was framed only on 12 May 2026 and no witness had been examined. The applicant pleaded innocence, asserted that his Article 21 rights were being violated, and offered to cooperate with the trial. The State opposed bail. The court, after noting the prolonged pre‑trial detention and lack of any witness examination, found that the applicant had made out a case for bail on a prima‑facie basis and ordered his release on bail subject to a personal bond and two sureties, with standard conditions. The bail order does not affect the merits of the trial.

Issues considered

Whether bail should be granted to the accused given the prolonged pre‑trial detention and lack of trial progress.
Whether the nature of the offences under the IPC and IT Act warrants denial of bail.
Whether the accused's right to liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution is being violated.

Legislation cited

Indian Penal Code — s. 318(4), 336(3), 338, 340(2)
Information Technology Act — s. 66D

Subjects

bail
pre‑trial detention
IPC
IT Act
Section 66D
Article 21
sureties
criminal procedure

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 18966 of 2026

Faizan
.....Applicant(s)
Versus

State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sunil Kumar Yadav
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 68
(Sr. No.87 out of 185)

HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.

1. List has been revised.

2. Heard Sri Sunil Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri R.P.
Patel, learned State Law Officer for the State and perused the material
placed on record.

3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.69 of 2025, under Sections 318(4),
336(3), 340(2), 338 B.N.S. and Section 66D I.T. Act, Police Station Cyber
Crime Police Thana Ghaziabad, District Ghaziabad, during the pendency of
trial.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is
absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. An
amount of Rs.9 lakhs is stated to have been transferred to the account of the
applicant, but the applicant has nothing to do with the said transfer of
money. His fundamental rights enshrined under Article 21 of the
Constitution of India stand violated as he is languishing in jail since
10.04.2025 and the period of incarceration comes out to be more than one
year and five months. The trial is not moving ahead. There is no criminal
history of the applicant. He undertakes to cooperate with the trial and not
misuse the liberty of bail.

5. Learned State Law Officer has vehemently opposed the bail application
but the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant could not
BAIL No. 18966 of 2026
2

be disputed.

6. This Court had called for the status of trial from the concerned Trial
Court. As per the said status report dated 13.08.2026, the charge against the
applicant was framed on 12.05.2026 only and no witness has been examined
to date.

7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by
learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into
consideration the period of incarceration of the applicant and the fact that no
witness has been examined to date, and without expressing any opinion on
the merits of the case, prima-facie the Court is of the view that the applicant
has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

8. Let the applicant- Faizan, be released on bail in the aforementioned case
crime on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties to the satisfaction of
the court concerned, subject to verification of sureties, with the conditions
that he shall not tamper with evidence or intimidate witnesses and shall
appear before the trial court as required.

9. Breach of any condition shall entail cancellation of bail. The observations
herein shall not affect the trial on merits.

(Krishan Pahal,J.)
September 8, 2026
(Ravi Kant)

Digitally signed by :-
RAVI KANT
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…