Allahabad High Court
BABLOO KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
Holding
The Court held that the bail application is a fit case for bail and allowed it.
Summary
The High Court of Allahabad considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, on behalf of Babloo Kumar, who was arrested on 28‑April‑2025 in a cyber‑fraud case (Crime No. 11 of 2024) involving offences under Sections 319(2), 318(4), 336(3), 338, 340(2), 61(2) of the BNS and Section 66D of the IT Act. The applicant claimed false implication, highlighted that co‑accused had already been granted bail, and asserted no prior criminal record. The State opposed bail, relying on confessional statements of co‑accused linking the applicant to the fraud. After reviewing the record, the Court found the matter suitable for bail and ordered the applicant’s release on a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties, subject to several conditions, while expressly stating that the order does not comment on the merits of the case.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 despite the seriousness of the alleged cyber‑fraud offences.
- Whether the confessional statements of co‑accused constitute sufficient ground to deny bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 483, 61(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 318(4), 319(2), 336(3), 338, 340(2)
- Information Technology Act, 2000 — s. 66D
Subjects
- bail
- cyber fraud
- confessional statement
- Section 483 BNS
- criminal procedure
- conditions of bail
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 22432 of 2025
Babloo Kumar
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Parvej Alam, Rakesh Kumar Srivastava, Rama
Shanker Yadav, Shamim Uddin Khan, Shiva
Priya Prasad
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 69
HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.
1. Supplementary affidavit filed by the learned counsel for the applicant is taken on
record.
2. Heard Sri Rakesh Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Shiv
Dutt Shukla, learned AGA for the State-respondents and perused the record.
3. The present bail application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha
Sanhita, 2023, has been filed on behalf of applicant with a prayer to release him on
bail in Case Crime No. 11 of 2024 under Sections 319(2), 318(4), 336(3), 338, 340(2),
61(2) BNS and 66D I.T. Act registered at Police Station Cyber Crime, District
Maharajganj during pendency of the trial.
4. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant has been
falsely implicated in this case and he has been languishing in jail since 28.4.2025. It is
further submitted that co-accused Om Bairagi, Sanjeev Vaishno and Kripal Singh
have already been granted bail by this Court. It is further submitted that FIR has been
lodged against unknown and during investigation, applicant was arrested and it has
surfaced that applicant has received Rs.5,00,000/- in his bank account as a result of the
alleged cyber fraud. It is also submitted that applicant has no criminal history to his
credit and he undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty, if granted. It has also been
pointed out that in the wake of heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is no
likelihood of any early conclusion of trial.
5. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the
applicant and submits that he was arrested during investigation and name of the
applicant has surfaced in the confessional statement of co-accused Om Bairagi and the
names of co-accused Om Bairagi and Sanjeev Vaishno have surfaced in the
confessional statement of co-accused Kripal Singh.
BAIL No. 22432 of 2025
2
6. FIR has been lodged against unknown and during investigation, it has surfaced that
applicant is said to have received 5,00,000/- in his bank account in the alleged cyber
fraud. Co-accused Om Bairagi, Sanjeev Vaishno and Kripal Singh have already been
granted bail by this Court and the applicant is languishing in jail since 28.4.2025.
7. Upon considering the totality of facts, nature and the evidence reflected from record
and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for
bail. Hence, the present bail application is ALLOWED.
8. Let the applicant Babloo Kumar involved in the aforesaid case crime be released
on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the
like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions :-
(i) 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 officer or tamper with the evidence.
(ii) The applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses.
(iii) 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 351 of B.N.S.S.
(iv) 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 the trial
court.
(v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either
personally or through his counsel.
9. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for
cancellation of bail.
10. It is clarified that anything said in this order is limited to the purpose of
determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression
on the merits of the case. The trial court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its
independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything said in
this order.
April 23, 2026
Madhurima
(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
MADHURIMA GARG
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…