The High Court of Judicature at Allahabad has granted anticipatory bail to a woman, Smt. Yasamin, in a case involving cyber fraud and impersonation. The Court, presided over by Justice Avnish Saxena, considered the applicant’s lack of criminal history and the nature of her involvement in the alleged siphoning of funds before granting relief under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS).
Background of the Case
The case originated from an First Information Report (FIR) lodged on June 18, 2024, regarding an incident that occurred on May 31, 2024. The informant alleged that he received a call from an anonymous individual impersonating an official from IndusInd Bank. The caller obtained account details from the informant, which subsequently led to the unauthorized siphoning of ₹3,24,764/- from his account.
According to the prosecution, these funds were distributed across various accounts. The applicant, Smt. Yasamin, was implicated because ₹15,000/- of the stolen amount was credited to her bank account. Consequently, Case Crime No. 58 of 2024 was registered at Police Station Cyber Crime, District Agra, under Sections 419 (punishment for cheating by personation) and 420 (cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), along with Sections 66C and 66D of the Information Technology (I.T.) Act.
Arguments Presented
Learned counsel for the applicant, Ms. Shabista Parveen, contended that the applicant herself was a victim and had been used by “unscrupulous persons.” It was further argued that the applicant has no prior criminal history and was not arrested during the investigation. While the applicant expressed a willingness to appear before the trial court following the submission of the charge sheet, she moved the anticipatory bail application due to an apprehension of arrest.
On the other hand, the learned Additional Government Advocate (AGA) representing the State opposed the prayer for bail.
Court’s Analysis and Cited Precedents
The Court noted that the scope of anticipatory bail is governed by principles established by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. The judgment specifically cited three landmark cases:
- Gurubaksh Singh Sibbia Vs. State of Punjab (1980) 2 SCC 565
- Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre Vs. State of Maharashtra (2011) 1 SCC 694
- Sushila Aggarwal and others Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and another (2020) 5 SCC 1
Referring to these precedents, the Court observed:
“…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.”
Evaluating the specific facts of the current case, the Court highlighted that the applicant was not arrested during the investigation and that there appeared to be a low flight risk.
The Decision
Granting the application, Justice Avnish Saxena ordered that Smt. Yasamin be released on bail upon appearing before the trial court or the Investigating Officer within 30 days. The relief is subject to furnishing a personal bond of ₹25,000/- with two sureties of the same amount.
The Court imposed several conditions, including:
- The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat, or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case.
- The applicant shall remain present before the trial court for the opening of the case, framing of charges, and recording of statements under Section 351 of the BNSS.
- The applicant shall file an undertaking not to seek adjournments on dates fixed for evidence when witnesses are present.
The Court clarified that its observations are limited to the bail application and do not reflect an expression on the merits of the case, stating, “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.”
Case Details:
- Case Title: Smt Yasamin vs. State of U.P.
- Case No.: Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 482 BNSS No. 4345 of 2026
- Bench: Justice Avnish Saxena
- Date: May 13, 2026
