Allahabad High Court
SAMEER ANSARIversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- AVNISH SAXENA
Holding
Bail was granted to the accused.
Summary
The accused, Sameer Ansari, applied for bail in a criminal case (Crime No. 378 of 2026) involving alleged cyber fraud under Sections 318(4), 317(4) of the IPC and Section 66D of the IT Act. He contended that his bank account was misused by a villager named Shahid, who paid him Rs.500 and used the account for a Rs.1.80 lakh transaction, making Ansari a victim rather than a perpetrator. The State opposed bail but did not dispute these factual assertions. The Court, after hearing counsel for both sides, noted the applicant’s lack of prior criminal record, his cooperation with the investigation, and the circumstances of the account misuse, and therefore granted bail without addressing the merits of the case. The bail was ordered on personal bond and two sureties, following Supreme Court precedents Girish Gandhi v. State of U.P. (2024) 10 SCC 674 and Policy Strategy for grant of bail in re (2024) 10 SCC 685, with a direction to cooperate in the judicial process.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused under Sections 318(4), 317(4) IPC and Section 66D IT Act given the alleged facts.
- Whether the accused can be considered a victim of account misuse and thus merit bail.
- Whether the applicant’s lack of prior criminal history and cooperation with investigation justify bail.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 317(4), 318(4)
- Information Technology Act, 2000 — s. 66D
Subjects
- bail
- cyber fraud
- IT Act
- Section 66D
- Indian Penal Code
- victim
- illiterate
- sureties
- Supreme Court precedent
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 32635 of 2026
Sameer Ansari
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Mohd. Nasim Ahmad
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 69
HON'BLE AVNISH SAXENA, J.
1. Sri Mohd. Nasim Ahmad, learned counsel for the applicant, hands up
the supplementary affidavit in support of the bail application. The same is
taken on record.
1A. Heard Sri Ahmad & Sri Saziya Praveen, learned counsel for the
accused-applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
1B. The bail application is nominated to this Court in order dated
17.09.2026 of Hon'ble the Chief Justice.
2. The present bail application has been moved by the accused-applicant
Sameer Ansari to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 378 of 2026,
under Sections 318(4), 317(4) BNS and Section 66D I.T. Act, P.S.-
Bhadohi, District- Bhadohi, during the pendency of trial.
3. It is contended by learned counsel for the accused-applicant that the
accused-applicant has been named in F.I.R. dated 06.08.2026 lodged by
the police against five persons including the accused-applicant in whose
bank account, the amount of cyber fraud is credited. Further contended
that a person named Shahid, who is of the same village, has asked the
applicant for use of his account and has paid Rs.500/- for the same. It is
because of Shahid that the accused-applicant has given his account
number for the transaction of Rs.1.80 lakhs, which was returned to Shahid
on account of payment of Rs.500/-. It is the accused-applicant, who is a
victim in this case, as his account is used. He is illiterate and in the
BAIL No. 32635 of 2026
2
business of weaving of carpets. The investigation is continuing. He is
cooperating in the investigation. The applicant has no criminal history.
The applicant is in jail since 07.08.2026 and hence, the applicant seeks to
be released on bail.
4. Learned A.G.A. for State has opposed the prayer for bail of the
applicant, but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.
5. This Court has taken into consideration the rival submissions made by
learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
6. Considered that the account of accused-applicant has been used by one
Shahid, as is disclosed in the supplementary affidavit filed today.
7. Hence, without touching merit of the case, the bail application is
allowed.
8. The accused/applicant be released on bail in the aforesaid case on
furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the
satisfaction of court concerned in view of observation made by the
Supreme Court in its dictums of Girish Gandhi Vs. State of Uttar
Pradesh [(2024) 10 SCC 674] and Policy Strategy for grant of bail in
re [(2024)10SCC 685].
9. The accused-applicant shall cooperate in judicial process for fair and
speedy disposal.
(Avnish Saxena,J.)
September 24, 2026
Shivangi
Digitally signed by :-
SHIVANGI YADAV
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…