Allahabad High Court
RAVI NISHADversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- AVNISH SAXENA
Holding
The bail application is allowed; the accused is entitled to release on bail.
Summary
The High Court considered a bail application filed by Ravi Nishad, who was arrested in a cyber‑fraud case (Criminal No. 711 of 2026) under sections 318(4), 351(3), 352, 61(2) of the B.N.S. and sections 66(C) and 66(D) of the Information Technology Act. The applicant’s counsel argued that he was falsely implicated, had no prior criminal record, and that co‑accused persons had already been granted bail. The State, represented by the Advocate General, opposed the bail. After reviewing the submissions and the record, the Court found no prima facie incriminating material against the applicant and, relying on the Supreme Court’s guidelines in Girish Gandhi v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Policy Strategy for Grant of Bail, allowed the bail application subject to a personal bond and two sureties. The Court ordered the applicant to cooperate with the investigation for a speedy disposal of the case.
Issues considered
- Whether the accused is entitled to bail despite the serious nature of the offences alleged under the B.N.S. and IT Act.
- Whether the absence of prima facie incriminating material and the grant of bail to co‑accused justify bail for the applicant.
- Whether the Supreme Court’s precedents in Girish Gandhi v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Policy Strategy for Grant of Bail are applicable.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 318(4), 351(3), 352, 61(2)
- Information Technology Act — s. 66(C), 66(D)
Subjects
- bail
- cyber fraud
- Information Technology Act
- false implication
- prima facie
- surety
- personal bond
- Supreme Court precedent
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 34863 of 2026
Ravi Nishad
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Naveen Kumar Yadav, Raj Pratap
Yadav
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 69
HON'BLE AVNISH SAXENA, J.
1. Heard Sri Ishtiyaq Khan, learned counsel holding brief for accused
applicant and learned A.G.A. for State.
2. The present bail application has been moved by the applicant accused-
Ravi Nishad to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 711 of 2026,
under Sections 318(4), 351(3), 352, 61(2) of BNS and Section 66 (C),
66(D) of I.T. Act, P.S.- Gulriha, District- Gorakhpur, during the pendency
of trial.
3. It is the contention of learned counsel for applicant that the accused
applicant has been falsely implicated in FIR dated 27.08.2026 lodged by
the informant Shubham Nishad with the allegation that the accused
applicant was instrumental in getting his account opened in the bank for
the purpose of cyber fraud though he was intimated that the account is
open just to get money for some employment related schemes of the
government. It is the contention of learned counsel that the accused
applicant has no criminal history. There is nothing on record to show the
complicity of accused applicant in the offence of cyber fraud. The co-
accused Vinay Sahani and Alok Sahani, who were attributed the same
role, have been granted bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide
orders dated 18.09.2026 and 21.09.2026, respectively. There is nothing
incriminating material against the accused applicant. Investigation is
continuing and applicant is co-operating in the investigation. The accused
applicant is languishing in jail since 27.08.2026. He seeks enlargement of
BAIL No. 34863 of 2026
2
accused on bail.
4. Learned A.G.A. for State opposed the bail application.
5. This Court has taken into consideration the rival submissions made by
learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
6. Considering the role of accused applicant and prima facie no
incriminating material is on record against the accused applicant, the
accused/applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
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 30, 2026
Sharad/-
Digitally signed by :-
SHARAD KUMAR SRIVASTAVA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…