Introduction
The client ran an online store from Lucknow. A dispute over a refund became a police complaint alleging that he had used a customer's identity and cheated her, invoking Sections 66C and 66D of the IT Act alongside the BNS cheating provisions.
He apprehended arrest and had already received a notice under Section 35 BNSS.
The Approach
We prepared the anticipatory bail application around the documentary record: the order history, the refund attempts, the platform's dispute log. The application was moved before the Sessions Court with a request for interim protection, and thereafter before the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court, where the electronic records were placed with the necessary certification.
The client cooperated with the investigation on the terms of the interim order, and the matter proceeded without custody.
Testimonial
“I was told which hearing to expect an order at, and that is when it came.”
Results
Interim order
Interim protection granted at the first hearing
Bail granted
Anticipatory bail confirmed by the Lucknow Bench
A refund dispute should never become a custody matter. The difference was a bail application that read like a commercial record rather than a plea.
Illustrative matters. Facts, names and identifying details have been changed or combined to protect client confidentiality. No outcome in any past matter is a promise about any future matter.
When To Call Sarvā Nyāy
If you are facing something like this, the first conversation is about what to preserve and where to file. It is without charge and without obligation.
