Allahabad High Court
RAMANversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- JAI PRAKASH TIWARI
Holding
The Court rejected the anticipatory bail application, finding no sufficient ground to grant bail under Section 482.
Summary
The High Court of Allahabad considered an anticipatory bail application filed by Raman under Section 482 of the CrPC in connection with alleged offences under IPC sections 318(4), 111(2), 61(2) and Section 66D of the Information Technology Act. The applicant claimed he was falsely implicated, asserted innocence, and argued that he had no knowledge of any monetary transactions. The State contended that the charge sheet and FIR specifically named the applicant, indicating a prima facie case. After reviewing the material, the Court found no sufficient ground to grant anticipatory bail, emphasizing that the allegations were specific and a charge sheet had already been filed. Consequently, the anticipatory bail application was rejected, with the order expressly stating it does not prejudice the merits of the substantive case.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted under Section 482 CrPC in the present circumstances
- Whether the allegations in the FIR and charge sheet are specific enough to deny anticipatory bail
- Whether the applicant's claim of innocence and lack of involvement warrants bail pending trial
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482
- Indian Penal Code — s. 111(2), 318(4), 61(2)
- Information Technology Act — s. 66D
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 482 CrPC
- Information Technology Act
- false implication
- criminal procedure
- bail jurisprudence
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No.
- 4351 of 2026
Raman
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sanjeev Kumar Trivedi
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 70
HON'BLE JAI PRAKASH TIWARI, J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the
State and perused the material available on record.
This anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant
seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 26/2025 under Sections -
318(4), 111(2), 61(2) BNS and Section- 66D of I.T. Act, Police Station -
Cybercrime District - Kannuaj during the pendency of trial.
Urge has been made on behalf of the applicant that the applicant has no
concern with the offence alleged against him. The applicant is innocent
and has been falsely implicated in this case. No offence has been
committed by the applicant. It is further submitted that the applicant has
no involvement in the monetary transactions. It is also submitted that the
applicant has no knowledge of any withdrawal of money from his
account. In case the applicant is granted anticipatory bail, there is no
possibility of misusing the liberty of anticipatory bail.
Learned A.G.A. has contended that the accusation levelled against the
applicant is specific.
Insofar as the allegations are concerned, the same is very much apparent
on record and charge sheet has already been submitted against the
applicant after due investigation.
In this case, bare perusal of the first information report itself shows that
NABAIL No. 4351 of 2026
2
the allegations are specific against the applicant. In case the applicant has
any grievance, he may avail remedy before the appropriate forum. No
good ground is made out for anticipatory bail.
Consequently, the instant anticipatory bail application is rejected.
It is made clear that observation made in this order shall have no bearing
on the merits of the case.
(Jai Prakash Tiwari,J.)
May 6, 2026
S.K.
Digitally signed by :-
SWEETY KANOJIA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…