DINESH JAINversusSTATE OF U.P.

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No.
                        - 4069 of 2026

Dinesh Jain
                                                          .....Applicant(s)
                                  Versus

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

Counsel for Applicant(s)      : Chandan Yadav, Dipanshu Kushwaha
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 71
                   HON'BLE AVNISH SAXENA, J.

1. Heard Sri Yogendra Kumar, learned counsel holding brief appeared for
the applicant and Learned AGA for the State.

2. The present anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of BNSS
has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to release him on
anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 7 of 2025, under Sections 318(4)
BNS and Section 66 D I.T. Act, P.S. Cyber Crime, District Kannauj
during pendency of the trial.

3. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the
accused/applicant has been falsely implicated in the cyber crme. The FIR
is lodged on 07.04.2025 with the allegation that the informant has been
duped of his money in the cyber fraud, wherein he has transferred money
to different accounts mentioned in the FIR for the purpose of investment.
He was allured of getting good return. The FIR is lodged against the one
mobile number of Saumya Singh and seven bank accounts. The applicant
is not named in the FIR. The applicant is not even connected with the said
bank accounts. The statement of one Manoj Kumar Gupta, a witness is
reflecting the name of applicant, wherein it is stated that the
accused/applicant has given money and took bank account details as well
as ATM cards of Manoj Kumar Gupta. He submits that the account
number of Manoj Kumar Gupta is neither disclosed in the investigation
nor the amount of informant is credited in that account. The
accused/applicant has no criminal history, the co-accused has been
                                                     NABAIL No. 4069 of 2026
                               2


granted anticipatory bail in order dated 18.11.2025 by the coordinate
Bench of this Court. The applicant wants to cooperate in the investigation
but apprehending arrest. Hence, seeks anticipatory bail.

4. Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the
applicant.

5. The scope of ambit of anticipatory bail is encapsulated in three
insightful judgments of Hon’ble Supreme Court right from Gurubaksh
Singh Sibbia Vs. State of Punjab reported in (1980) 2 SCC 565,
Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre Vs. State of Maharashtra reported in
(2011) 1 SCC 694 and Sushila Aggarwal and others Vs. State (NCT of
Delhi) and another reported in (2020) 5 SCC 1, wherein it is
consistently held by Hon’ble Apex Court that while granting anticipatory
bail, the Court should considering the application of the applicant to
evaluate the threat or apprehension of arrest vis-a-vis the nature and
gravity of accusation, criminal antecedent of the accused, false or
exaggerated implication, need of custodial interrogation, willingness of
the accused to cooperate in investigation and trial and the conduct of the
accused and flight risk.

6. Considering that prim facie there is no direct role of accused/applicant.
Further this Court, while considering the gravity of accusation and
apprehension of arrest in the case vis-a-vis low flight risk and assurance
of the accused in cooperating with the investigation and trial, is of
considered view to grant anticipatory bail.

7. The applicant- Dinesh Jain involved in the aforesaid case crime shall
appear before the trial court or the Investigating Officer as the case may
be within thirty days from the date of this order and shall be released on
bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- with two sureties each
in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with
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.
                                                        NABAIL No. 4069 of 2026
                                 3


(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 BNSS.

(iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he/she 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.

8. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for
cancellation of bail.

9. 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.

10. The below mentioned directions shall be complied with for
expeditious disposal of trial, in case charge sheet is submitted against
accused/applicant :-

10.1 As the investigation is continuing, in the event charge sheet is
submitted and cognizance is taken, it would be the duty of the
accused/applicant to appear before the trial court or Magistrate concerned
as the case may be without waiting for the issuance of summons, within
60 days from the date of cognizance or on the date fixed, which ever is
earlier. So that the trial may not be delayed for non execution of summons
or processes.

10.2 The District Judge concerned shall direct each Magistrate and
Special courts to maintain a register of Anticipatory Bail orders granted
by this Court, wherein the details of Anticipatory Bail shall be entered.
The dedicated official shall be nominated in each Special court and
Magistrate court for maintaining the register.
                                                                                        NABAIL No. 4069 of 2026
                                                                  4


                                    10.3 The accused/applicant shall provide a copy of the final order of
                                    anticipatory bail within 30 days, to the official concerned in whose
                                    jurisdiction the case lies and shall provide his complete contact details
                                    including the mobile number and E-mail ID (if maintained); any change
                                    in detail shall be informed by the applicant.

                                    10.4 On the submission of charge sheet and cognizance taken, the
                                    Presiding Officer shall fetch the details of the accused/applicant and the
                                    dedicated official shall inform the accused at the given detail.


                                                                                          (Avnish Saxena,J.)
                                    May 6, 2026
                                    Abhishek Sri.




Digitally signed by :-
ABHISHEK RANJAN SRIVASTAVA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad