Court Evaluates Low Flight Risk and Assures Cooperation in Granting Bail with Conditions
In a significant ruling, the Allahabad High Court has granted anticipatory bail to Smt. Yasamin, who was implicated in a cyber fraud case under the charges of impersonation and cheating. The decision was delivered by Justice Avnish Saxena on May 13, 2026, in response to an application filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS).
The case stems from an incident dated May 31, 2024, when an informant was allegedly defrauded of Rs. 3,24,764 through a phishing call impersonating an official from IndusInd Bank. Part of the fraudulent transfer, a sum of Rs. 15,000, was credited to an account linked to the applicant, Smt. Yasamin. The applicant, represented by counsel Chaman Aara and Shabista Parveen, argued that she was a victim of circumstance with no criminal history and was not arrested during the investigation phase.
The court, after hearing the arguments from both sides, including opposition from the government advocate, assessed key factors such as the gravity of the accusation, the applicant’s cooperation assurance, absence of criminal antecedents, and low flight risk. The decision aligns with precedents set by the Supreme Court in landmark cases like Gurubaksh Singh Sibbia, Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre, and Sushila Aggarwal, emphasizing the evaluation of threat, nature of accusations, and the need for custodial interrogation when considering anticipatory bail.
Justice Saxena concluded that granting anticipatory bail was justified given the circumstances, provided certain conditions were met to ensure the integrity of the judicial process. These conditions include the applicant’s appearance before the trial court within 30 days, a personal bond of Rs. 25,000 with two sureties, and adherence to multiple stipulations designed to prevent interference with evidence and ensure trial participation. The court explicitly warned that any breach of these conditions could lead to bail cancellation.
Moreover, the order clarified that the observations made for this bail application should not influence the trial court’s determination of the case’s merits. The trial court retains full discretion to independently assess the evidence presented.
The judgment underscores the judiciary's balanced approach in safeguarding individual liberties while ensuring justice in cases involving complex cyber crimes.
Bottom line:-
Anticipatory bail granted considering absence of arrest during investigation, low flight risk, and assurance of cooperation by the applicant. Conditions imposed to prevent interference with evidence and ensure presence during trial proceedings.
Statutory provision(s): Section 482 of BNSS, Sections 419 and 420 of IPC, Sections 66C and 66D of I.T. Act
Smt. Yasamin v. State of U.P., (Allahabad) : Law Finder Doc id # 2898853
