Uttarakhand High Court
BA1/828/2025 on 12 June, 2025
Author: Rakesh Thapliyal
Bench: Rakesh Thapliyal
2025:UHC:4885
Office Notes,
reports, orders
or proceedings
SL.
Date or directions COURT'S OR JUDGE'S ORDERS
No.
and Registrar's
order with
Signatures
BA1 No. 828 of 2025
Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J.
1. Mr. Bhuvnesh Joshi, learned counsel
for the applicant.
2. Mr. Siddhartha Bisht and Mr. N.S.
Kanyal, learned AGA for the State.
3. Mr. Rishab Ranghar, learned counsel
for the informant.
4. Present applicant-Manoj Jaiswal S/o
Shri Ram Sagar, is seeking bail in relation
to first information report dated 19.10.2024
bearing FIR No. 0076 of 2024, Police Station
Cyber PS, District Dehradun, which, in fact,
was lodged against some unknown persons
for the offences punishable under Sections
420, 120-B IPC read with Section 66(D) of
the Information Technology Act.
5. It is submitted by learned counsel for
the applicant that the present applicant is
innocent and has been falsely implicated
and though the investigation is still going
on, however, in respect of the present
applicant, the charge-sheet has already
been filed.
6. Learned counsel for the applicant
further submits that the present applicant
has no previous criminal history and since
the charge-sheet has already been filed,
there is no need of custodial interrogation of
the present applicant. Apart from this,
learned counsel for the applicant submits
that no amount was credited into the
account of the present applicant and
whatever be the amount was credited, the
same was credited in the account of one
Sanjeev Singh. He also submits that the
present applicant has no nexus with
2025:UHC:4885
Sanjeev Singh and Sanjeev Singh has not
yet been arrested.
7. On the other side, learned counsel for
the complainant as well as learned counsel
for the State vehemently opposed the bail
application and submits that the applicant
is the person, from whose possession, at
about 16 Nos. of SIMS, two GSM land lines
and eight boxes of GSM land lines were
recovered. He also submits that the
mobiles, which was having by the applicant,
contained all the messages of the
transactions. He submits that it is an
organized crime, organized by the persons
living in different parts of the country and
the complainant, who is the victim, has
been cheated by them.
8. After hearing the arguments of learned
counsel for the applicant, the counsel for
the State as well as the counsel for the
complainant and on perusal of the FIR, and
other documents placed on record including
the counter-affidavit, in which the
statement of the SI Kuldeep Tamta, the
Statement of the constable Sohan Badoni
and the constable Subham Chaudhary have
been enclosed, it reveals that the present
applicant is involved in an organized crime,
which is apparently a very serious issue for
the society, and the investigation against
the rest of the accused is still going on and
if at this stage, the applicant is enlarged on
bail, there may be possibility that the
applicant, in any manner, may influence the
investigation, therefore, this Court is of the
view that the applicant is not entitled for
bail.
9. Accordingly, the bail application is
rejected.
(Rakesh Thapliyal, J.)
12.06.2025
R.Bisht
2025:UHC:4885