Shiv Kumar Alias Shivay Mehra vs State Of U.P.

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Neeraj Kumar Sharma, learned A.G.A. for the State-opposite party. 2. The present bail application has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 72 of 2025, under Sections 318(4), 338, 61(2) B.N.S. and 66(D) Information and Technology Act, Police Station Cyber Crime, District Kanpur Nagar during the pendency of the trial. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant was not named in the first information report. The alleged mobile number from which whats-app call was made to the informant, does not belong to the applicant. A total sum of Rs. 3,30,40,000/- (Three Crore Thirty Lakhs Forty Thousand only) through multiple transactions has been transferred from the bank account of the informant. It is contended that no amount has been credited in the bank account of the applicant. The applicant is not a beneficiary of any illicit transaction. On the basis of an information furnished by an informer, the applicant was arrested along with 7 other co-accused. False recovery of a mobile phone has been shown from the applicant. There is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. The recovered mobile phone do not link the applicant with the offence. Identically placed co-accused Alok Kumar Gupta, Abhay Mishra @ Nitin and Shivam Patel have been granted bail by this Court vide orders dated 20.03.2026, 31.03.2026 and 20.04.2026 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 8683 of 2026, 10906 of 2026 and 12979 of 2026 respectively. The applicant claims parity. The applicant is in jail since 26.12.2025 having no criminal history and if he is released on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty. 4. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. 5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of the record, this Court prima facie finds that the applicant was not named in the first information report. On the basis of information furnished by an informer, the applicant was arrested along with 7 other co-accused. There is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. At this stage there is no corroborative evidence to link the applicant with the offence. Identically placed co-accused Alok Kumar Gupta, Abhay Mishra @ Nitin and Shivam Patel have been granted bail by this Court. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. Moreover, the applicant has remained confined for more than four months and there is no hope of early conclusion of trial, and no reasonable apprehension has been brought to the fore by the State that the applicant, if enlarged on bail, would either tamper with the evidence or delay the trial or intimidate the witness, therefore, without commenting on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. 6. Let the applicant- Shiv Kumar @ Shivay Mehra involved in the aforesaid case, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Court concerned subject to the conditions that he: (i) shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court; (ii) shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; and, (iii) shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses. 7. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court. (Vivek Varma,J.) May 6, 2026 v.k. updh.