Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Information Technology Act

503 judgments · newest first · showing 1–200

SALIM VAJIR PATHAN AND OTHERSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

APPLICATION ALLOWED

The applicants, Salim Vajir Pathan and others, filed criminal revision applications under Section 227 of the CrPC seeking discharge from three POCSO cases where a Special Judge had rejected their earlier discharge applications. They argued that the charge‑sheet contained only a single allegation …

SALIM VAJIR PATHAN AND OTHERSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

APPLICATION ALLOWED

The applicants, Salim Vajir Pathan and others, filed criminal revision applications under Section 227 CrPC seeking discharge from three POCSO cases where a Special Judge had rejected their earlier discharge applications. They argued that the charge‑sheet contained only a single incriminating …

SALIM VAJIR PATHAN AND OTHERSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

APPLICATION ALLOWED

The applicants, Salim Vajir Pathan and others, filed criminal revision applications under Section 227 of the CrPC seeking discharge from three POCSO cases where the Special Judge had rejected their earlier discharge applications. They argued that the charge‑sheet contained only a single …

NIRAJ TIRTHKUMAR NAVLANIversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

DISPOSED OFF

The applicant, Niraj Tirthkumar Navlani, was arrested for alleged fraud involving a WhatsApp group, RTGS deposits and loss of funds, charged under Section 420 of the IPC and Sections 66(C) and 66(D) of the Information Technology Act. He contended that the investigation was complete, no property was …

AWINASH KUMAR GUPTAversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS

Allowed

The petitioners and the State of Maharashtra sought the quashing of FIR No. 608/2024, filed under the Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors (In Financial Establishments) Act, 1999 and the Information Technology Act, on the basis that all investors had settled and a consent affidavit was …

OM SO NARAYAN CHAVANversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR

Allowed

The appellant, Om, sought anticipatory bail after being charged under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, the Information Technology Act and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act for alleged sexual exploitation and intimidation of a scheduled‑caste victim. The prosecution …

AZIM ANSARIversusSTATE OF U.P.

Azim Ansari applied for bail in a cyber‑crime case (Criminal No. 46 of 2025) alleging he hacked a bank account and siphoned Rs.42.5 lakh, with a recovered car linked to the proceeds. The FIR was lodged on 8‑Dec‑2025 and the accused has been in custody since 13‑Sep‑2026. The prosecution argued the …

PRASHANT SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicant, Prashant Singh, filed an application under Section 528 of the CrPC seeking to quash criminal proceedings (Case No. 3115370 of 2025) that arose under several IPC sections and Section 66D of the IT Act. The trial court had verified that the parties had reached a written compromise, …

ROBIN KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking quash of an FIR dated 09-11-2025 registered under Sections 319(2) and 318(4) of the Bhartiya Nagrika Suraksha Sanhita and Section 66D of the Information Technology Act. The High Court examined the FIR and held that it disclosed a prima facie commission of …

RAVI KULSHRESTHA @ RAVI KUMAR AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicants – Ravi Kulshrestha, Rohit Kumar Sharma and Mayank Sikarwar – filed an application under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S. seeking to quash a non‑bailable warrant issued by the Special Judge (SC/ST Act) in Agra. During the hearing, counsel for the applicants withdrew the prayer to quash the …

SARFARAJversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicant, Sarfaraj, filed a bail application in a cyber‑crime case (Cr. No. 37 of 2025) alleging that he was not named in the FIR and was only implicated by a co‑accused’s statement, which the court found unreliable. No independent witness or corroborative evidence linked him to the alleged …

RAVI NISHADversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Ravi Nishad, who was arrested in a cyber‑fraud case (Criminal No. 711 of 2026) under sections 318(4), 351(3), 352, 61(2) of the B.N.S. and sections 66(C) and 66(D) of the Information Technology Act. The applicant’s counsel argued that he was …

ALATMASH MALIK @ KURBANversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicant, Alatmash Malik, filed an anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code in connection with a case (Crime No. 250 of 2025) involving alleged offences under Section 353(2) of the Bihar Negotiable Securities Act (BNSS) and Section 66 of the Information …

VARISversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Varis, who was arrested in connection with a case under Sections 108, 308(2) of the B.N.S. and Section 66-D of the Information Technology Act for alleged abetment of suicide. The applicant contended that he was falsely implicated, pointing to a …

PRIYANSHU SHARMAversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicant, Priyanshu Sharma, filed an anticipatory bail application under sections 111(2)(B), 318(2), 319(2) of the B.N.S. and section 66D of the IT Act in a criminal case. He later sought to withdraw the anticipatory bail application and instead file a regular bail application before the trial …

RAJESHWARI JAYESH JOSHIversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Dismissed

The applicant, Rajeshwari Jayesh Joshi, filed an anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking pre‑arrest bail for alleged offences under Section 66D of the Information Technology Act, 2000 and Sections 318(4), 319 and 351(2) of the …

RIZWAN AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P.

Rizwan and Shahid were arrested in connection with a case involving alleged recovery of a mobile phone, Aadhaar card and SIM card, and charged under several sections of the Indian Penal Code and the Information Technology Act. The applicants argued that they were falsely implicated, noting the …

SAUMIL MODENWAL AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P.

The Allahabad High Court considered a bail application filed by Shomil Modanwal and Abhay Maurya in a cyber‑crime case (Crime No. 50 of 2025) involving alleged recovery of various documents and valuables. The applicants contended that the recovered items were falsely planted and that there was no …

DEVANAND GIRIversusSTATE OF U.P.

The Allahabad High Court considered a bail application filed by Devanand Giri, who is charged under Sections 376 and 506 of the IPC and Section 67B of the IT Act for alleged rape, criminal intimidation and publishing a video of the incident. The FIR was lodged more than two years after the alleged …

SANTOSH KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P.

Santosh Kumar applied for bail in a criminal case (Crime No. 22 of 2026) involving alleged offences under Sections 49, 317(5), 318(4), 351(2), 352 of the BNS Act and Sections 66C and 66D of the Information Technology Act. The court considered the facts, the applicant’s clean criminal record, and the …

SUNEEL RAJPOOTversusSTATE OF U.P.

Suneel Rajpoot applied for bail in a case registered as Crime No. 03 of 2024, involving alleged offences under Sections 419, 420, 120‑B of the IPC and Section 66D of the Information Technology Act. The applicant argued that he was falsely implicated, not named in the FIR, and that the only basis for …

AMAN KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P.

Aman Kumar applied for bail in a criminal case (Crime No. 22 of 2026) involving offences under Sections 49, 317(5), 318(4), 351(2), 352 of the BNS Act and Sections 66C and 66D of the Information Technology Act. The court considered the facts, the evidence, the fact that a co‑accused, Satyam Singh, …

MOHAMMED ALFAIZ ANSARIversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR.

Disposed Off

Petitioner Mohammed Alfaiz Ansari challenged FIR No.309/2024 alleging offences under IPC sections 376(2)(n), 201, 323, 504, 506 and IT Act section 67, filed by the victim, Respondent No.2. The victim later submitted an affidavit stating the relationship was consensual, she does not wish to …

RITESH PALversusSTATE OF U.P.

The Allahabad High Court considered a bail application filed by Ritesh Pal, who is charged under Sections 64(2)m, 351(3), 352 BNS of the IPC and Section 66(E) of the Information Technology Act for an alleged rape that was reported in an FIR two years after the incident. The applicant contended that …

IBRAHIM ANSARIversusSTATE OF U.P.

Ibrahim Ansari applied for bail in a case involving alleged offences under the Indian Penal Code, the Information Technology Act and the Aadhaar Card Act. He claimed he was falsely implicated, stating that no fake driving licence was recovered from him and that the two laptops seized were not …

HUSAINversusSTATE OF U.P.

Husain applied for bail in a criminal case (Crime No. 358 of 2026) involving alleged offences under Sections 318(4), 336(3), 338, 340(2) of the BNS Act and Sections 66C & 66D of the Information Technology Act. The applicant claimed false implication, noting that the FIR lacked any named victim and …

RAJNEESH MISHRA ALIAS VIKAS MISHRAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The Allahabad High Court considered an anticipatory bail application filed by Rajneesh Mishra (alias Vikas Mishra) in a criminal case involving alleged rape, sections 64, 351(3) BNS and 67 of the IT Act. The applicant claimed innocence, arguing that the allegations stemmed from a consensual …

MODEBE OOKPO JOSEPHversusSTATE OF U.P.

Modebe Ookpo Joseph applied for bail in a cyber‑crime case (Crime No. 70 of 2024) where he is charged under IPC sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120‑B, 201 and IT Act section 66. The High Court examined the facts, the evidence, and noted that a co‑accused, Sunday Okonkwo, had already been released on …

GAUTAM YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicant, Gautam Yadav, filed an application under Section 528 of the BNSS Act challenging a charge sheet dated 26‑07‑2023 that alleged offences under Section 420 IPC, the Uttar Pradesh Public Service Commission Act and the Information Technology Act. The applicant’s counsel argued that no …

UMESH @ UMESH KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioner, Umesh Kumar, filed a writ petition seeking quash of an FIR alleging forgery of remand papers and misuse for unlawful benefit. The respondents, the State of Uttar Pradesh and others, argued that the FIR discloses a prima facie offence and that investigation is underway, invoking …

ALOK SAHANIversusSTATE OF U.P.

Alok Sahani applied for bail in a criminal case (Crime No. 711 of 2026) involving offences under Sections 318(4), 351(3), 352, 61(2) of the Uttar Pradesh B.N.S. Act and Sections 66(C), 66(D) of the Information Technology Act. The court noted that a co‑accused, Vinay Sahani, had already been released …

RAVINDRA KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P.

Ravindra Kumar applied for bail in a criminal case (Crime No.14 of 2026) involving alleged offences under Sections 318(4), 61(2), 123, 303(2) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 66D of the Information Technology Act. The applicant claimed he was falsely implicated, asserting that the FIR was …

OM PRAKASH NISHADversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a second bail application filed by Om Prakash Nishad, who is charged under IPC sections 376, 506, 452 and IT Act section 67 for alleged rape, intimidation, house‑trespass and possession of an obscene video. The applicant contended that the victim’s statements and the …

PAWAN KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P.

Pawan Kumar was arrested in connection with a case (Crime No.409 of 2026) involving alleged offences under several sections of the Indian Penal Code and Section 66‑D of the Information Technology Act. He contended that the FIR was lodged two and a half years after the alleged petty transactions, …

AAKASH GANGWARversusSTATE OF U.P.

Aakash Gangwar was charged in Crime No. 337 of 2026 under Sections 61(2) and 318(4) of the BNS and Section 66D of the Information Technology Act. He applied for bail during the pendency of trial. The court examined the material on record, the submissions of counsel, and noted that a co‑accused, …

PRASHANT KUMAR @ TILLUversusSTATE OF U.P.

Prashant Kumar @ Tillu was arrested in connection with a case (Crime No. 245 of 2026) alleging offences under Sections 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 61(2) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 66D of the Information Technology Act, including a alleged deposit of Rs. 1.5 lakh in his account. The …

ARMANversusSTATE OF U.P.

Arman applied for bail in a cyber‑crime case (Crime No.04 of 2025) involving alleged offences under Sections 61(2) and 318(4) of the B.N.S. and Sections 66 and 66D of the Information Technology Act. The applicant’s criminal history was explained and the court noted that a co‑accused, Harsh Vardhan …

ADITYA KUMAR SINHA AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF UP AND 3 OTHERS

Petitioners Aditya Kumar Sinha and another filed a writ petition seeking quash of an FIR dated 06.07.2026 under Sections 308(2), 351(2) of the B.N.S.S and Section 67 of the IT Act, and a direction that they not be arrested. They also prayed that the police follow the Supreme Court's guidelines in …

SIDDHARTH SONKAR @ GULSHAN AND 3 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Petitioners Siddharth Sonkar and three others filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking quash of an FIR dated 25‑03‑2026 registered under Section 351(3) of the BNS Act and Section 67 of the Information Technology Act. They alleged that the FIR was fabricated because petitioner‑1 was in a …

SAGAR CHAUHANversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicant, Sagar Chauhan, was charged in Crime No. 452 of 2026 under several provisions of the Information Technology Act, including sections 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 61(2) BNS and 66D. He applied for bail during the pendency of trial, asserting that he has no prior criminal record. The …

RANVIR SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P.

Ranveer Singh was arrested in connection with Crime No.210 of 2025, alleged to have committed offences under Sections 123, 69, 351(3), 308(5) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 67A of the Information Technology Act. After a first bail application was rejected, he filed a second bail petition …

PAWANversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Pawan, accused under Section 70(2) of the B.N.S. and Sections 5(j)(ii) and 6 of the POCSO Act for the alleged rape of a 15‑year‑old girl who became pregnant. The applicant claimed he was falsely implicated, asserted that the victim’s statement …

UMANG ALIAS VISHAL ALIAS SHAZEBversusSTATE OF U.P.

Umang alias Vishal alias Shazeb applied for bail in a criminal case (Crime No. 20 of 2026) involving offences under Sections 318(4), 336, 338, 340(2) of the BNS and Sections 66C and 66D of the Information Technology Act, filed by the Cyber Crime Police Station, Muzaffarnagar. The applicant argued …

VIRENDRA KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P.

Virendra Kumar applied for bail in a criminal case (Crime No. 0014 of 2026) involving offences under Sections 318(4), 319(2), 336(3), 338, 339, 3(5) of the IPC and Section 66 of the Information Technology Act. The applicant had no prior criminal record, and a co‑accused, Ashish Patwa, had already …

ROVINversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicant, Rovin, was arrested in connection with Crime No. 376 of 2026 for alleged possession of 130 grams of alprazolam powder and charged under several provisions of the Indian Penal Code, the Information Technology Act, and the NDPS Act. He contended that he was falsely implicated, that the …

NEMCHANDversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicant, Nemchand, sought bail in a criminal case (Crime No. 540 of 2025) involving offences under Sections 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 61(2) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 66D of the Information Technology Act. The court considered his criminal history, which was explained, and noted …

RANVEERversusSTATE OF U.P.

Ranveer applied for bail in a criminal case (Crime No.138 of 2024) involving offences under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120‑B of the Indian Penal Code and Section 66‑D of the Information Technology Act. The court noted that a co‑accused, Mufeed, had already been granted bail in a similar …

ABHISHEK VERMAversusSTATE OF U.P.

Abhishek Verma applied for bail in a criminal case (Crime No.124 of 2026) involving offences under several sections of the Indian Penal Code and the Information Technology Act. The applicant argued that he had no prior criminal record and that a co‑accused, Hitesh Nigam Vayask, had already been …

GOLU KUMAR @ SHIVSHANKAR KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicant, Golu Kumar (also known as Shivshankar Kumar), applied for bail in a criminal case (Crime No.30 of 2026) involving offences under Sections 318(4), 61(2), 316(5) of the Indian Penal Code, Sections 3, 4, 5 of the Prize and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act and Section 66‑D of the …

PINKU KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P.

Pinku Kumar was arrested in connection with Crime No.30 of 2026 for alleged offences under Sections 318(4), 61(2), 316(5) of the Indian Penal Code, Sections 3, 4, 5 of the Prize and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act and Section 66-D of the Information Technology Act. He applied for bail during …

KUSH PATELversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Kush Patel, who was charged under several provisions of the B.N.S., the Uttar Pradesh Public Examination Act and Section 66(D) of the Information Technology Act. The applicant argued that the co‑accused's statement implicating him lacked …

MOHD NAWABversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicant, Mohd Nawab, was charged under several sections of the Indian Penal Code (318(4), 338, 336(3), 341(2), 317(2)), the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act, 2023 and Section 66‑D of the Information Technology Act in Crime No. 230 of 2026. He applied for bail while the trial was pending. The …

DEEPAK SHARMA @ DEEPUversusSTATE OF U.P.

Deepak Sharma applied for bail in a cyber‑crime case involving multiple IPC offences and a provision of the IT Act. The court noted that an accused’s prior criminal record cannot, by itself, justify continued detention if bail criteria are otherwise satisfied. The applicant’s criminal history was …

GOPAL TIWARIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

Gopal Tiwari filed an application under Section 528 of the BNSS seeking to quash two orders that rejected his request to release two mobile phones seized in a criminal case (Criminal Case No. 3803 of 2024) involving offences under Sections 189, 170, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 of the IPC and Section 66 …

TANVIR KHANversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicant, Tanvir Khan, was detained since 1 January 2024 in connection with a cyber‑crime case (Crime No.31 of 2024) involving offences under Sections 419 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 66C and 66D of the Information Technology Act. He applied for bail during the pendency of …

FAIZANversusSTATE OF U.P.

Faizan was arrested in connection with a cyber‑crime case involving alleged transfer of Rs.9 lakhs and charged under Sections 318(4), 336(3), 340(2), 338 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 66D of the Information Technology Act. He had been in custody since 10 April 2025, amounting to more than one …

AJAI KUMAR SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS

Ajai Kumar Singh filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the police to conduct a fair, speedy, and proper investigation of an FIR dated 05.05.2024 under IPC sections 420, 406 and IT Act section 66. The petitioner alleged that the police were not investigating …

RANI DEVIversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered an anticipatory bail application filed by Rani Devi, who was accused of misappropriating a family pension of Rs. 20,32,771 and facing charges under various IPC sections, CrPC Section 482, and IT Act Section 66(D). The applicant claimed she was falsely implicated, had …

SUJIT KUMAR GHOSHversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicant, Sujit Kumar Ghosh, filed an anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the CrPC after a charge sheet was filed. The Additional Government Advocate argued that the alleged offences, punishable with less than seven years’ imprisonment, did not create a risk of arrest. The …

ADARSH DIXIT AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicants filed an application under Section 528 of the Bharat Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) seeking to set aside a charge sheet filed under IPC Section 420 and IT Act Section 66, and an order of the Small Cause Court dated 29‑09‑2023. They contended that no offence was made out against them …

VIJAY KUMAR SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

Vijay Kumar Singh filed an application under Section 528 of the BNSS seeking to quash criminal proceedings (IPC sections 419, 420, 406, 467, 468, 471, 120B and IT Act section 66D) that arose from FIR No. 0718/2021. He contended that no offence was made out, the prosecution was malicious, the FIR was …

ARPIT RAJversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

Arpit Raj filed an application under Section 528 of the BNSS seeking to quash criminal proceedings arising from FIR No. 66/2025, which alleged offences under Sections 318(4), 308(2), 319(2), 351(3) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 66 of the IT Act. The applicant argued that no offence was made …

BHUPENDRAversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicant, Bhupendra, was charged under Sections 419, 420, 120B of the Indian Penal Code and Section 66D of the Information Technology Act for alleged cyber‑related offences. He applied for bail during the pendency of trial. The court noted that a co‑accused, Sunil Kumar, had already been …

JITENDRA BRIJA SAHANIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicant filed an application under Section 528 of the BNSS seeking to quash a prosecution order dated 25-10-2024 issued by the Chief Judicial Magistrate of Bulandshahr. The court examined the allegations, which involved offences under Section 420 of the IPC and Section 66D of the IT Act, and …

PAWAN KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

Pawan Kumar filed an application under Section 528 of the BNSS Act seeking to set aside a prosecution order dated 23.01.2025 and to obtain bail, alleging that he had not yet been arrested and that the police were attempting to arrest him. The court examined the allegations, noting they pertained to …

RISHI SHARMA @ RINKUversusSTATE OF U.P.

Rishi Sharma was charged under Sections 317(2) and 318(4) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 66-D of the Information Technology Act in Crime No. 254 of 2026. He applied for bail during the pendency of trial. The court noted that a co‑accused, Durgesh Kumar, had already been released on bail in a …

SOHIL KHANversusSTATE OF UP AND 3 OTHERS

The applicant, Sohil Khan, sought bail in a criminal case involving charges under sections of the IPC, the POCSO Act and the IT Act. He claimed innocence, stating that no indecent photographs were recovered and that the allegations were false. The State opposed bail but could not refute the …

PIYUSH JASWANTRAI MEHTA AND ANRversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR

Disposed Off

The applicants filed a criminal application seeking quash of C.C. No.185/PW of 2022, which arose from FIR No.53 of 2021 alleging offences under Sections 420, 408, 467, 468, 34 of the IPC and Sections 43, 66, 72 of the IT Act. The parties later entered into a consent settlement recorded in a civil …

AJINKIYA RAMESHBHAI WANKHADEversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

38-RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @ FH

The applicant sought regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in connection with an FIR alleging offences under Section 317(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 66(C) and 66(D) of the Information Technology Act. The applicant claimed innocence, …

JAYDEEPKUMAR ASHOKBHAI THAKKAR (JAYDIP @JAYESH THAKKAR)versusSTATE OF GUJARAT

38-RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @ FH

The High Court of Gujarat entertained an anticipatory bail application filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 by Jaydeepkumar Ashokbhai Thakkar in connection with FIR C.R. No.11201018260025 alleging offences under Sections 318(4), 61(2), 317(4) of the Bharatiya Nyay …

KETAN ASHOKBHAI PATELversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

38-RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @ FH

The applicant, Ketan Ashokbhai Patel, filed an anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) seeking protection from arrest in connection with a cyber‑crime FIR alleging offences under various BNSS sections and Sections 66(c) and 66(d) of the IT …

ANIL PRAMODBHAI PATELversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

38-RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @ FH

Anil Pramodbhai Patel applied for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in connection with an FIR (C.R. No.11201018250032 of 2025) alleging offences under Sections 317(2), 318(4), 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita and Section 66(d) of the Information …

AMITKUMAR S/O. RAJKUMAR JITRAWALversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

38-RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @ FH

The High Court of Gujarat considered a regular bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for Amitkumar who was charged under IPC sections 406, 408, 409, 420, 120B and IT Act section 66(D) for a alleged fake online investment scheme. The applicant …

ABHIJEET SANJAY KULKARNI AND ANR.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Rejected

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Abhijeet Sanjay Kulkarni and another accused in a case involving alleged cheating of investors amounting to Rs.6.22 crore, charged under Sections 406, 409, 420, 468, 471 of the IPC, Sections 3 and 4 of the Maharashtra Protection of Interest of …

ABHAY DHIRUBHAI PARSANIYAversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

38-RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @ FH

The High Court of Gujarat considered an application for regular bail filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, after a charge‑sheet had been filed in FIR C.R. No.11203024250934 (2025) alleging offences under Sections 317(2) and 317(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and …

NILKANT JAGESHWAR KASARUJI GAZBHIYEversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

38-RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @ FH

The applicant, Nilkant Jageshwar Kasaruji Gazbhiye, sought regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita after a charge‑sheet was filed for alleged cyber‑fraud offences under several sections of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita and Section 66 of the Information Technology Act. …

NARENDRA MAHESHKUMAR MALIversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

38-RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @ FH

The applicant, Narendra Maheshkumar Mali, was arrested in connection with a cyber‑fraud case where his bank account was allegedly used to transfer and withdraw Rs 9.5 lakh, receiving a commission of Rs 9,000. He filed a regular bail application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha …

ARVINDBHAI TULSIDAS SADHUversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

38-RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @ FH

The applicant Arvinbhai TulsiDas Sadhu filed a regular bail application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking release in connection with FIR C.R. No. 143/2014 alleging offences of rape, criminal intimidation and cyber offences under the IPC and IT Act. The State …

HARSHVARDHANSINH @ RAVAN VIRENDRASINH NANDSINH CHAUHANversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

38-RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @ FH

The petitioner, Harshvarshansinh @ Ravan Virendrasinh Nandsinh Chauhan, was charged under Sections 64(1) and 351(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 66(c), 66(e) and 67 of the Information Technology Act for allegedly having a physical relationship with a 21‑year‑old victim and …

VIKASH PUKHRAJ BHARGAVversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

38-RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @ FH

The applicant sought regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for offences alleged under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and the Information Technology Act. The FIR alleged that the applicant's SIM card was used by a cousin to run a fraudulent astrology …

BHUPAL NANAVATH S/O NANAVATH PUNYA NAIKversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

38-RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @ FH

The applicant, Bhupal Nanavath, sought regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in connection with a cyber‑crime FIR alleging cheating, criminal breach of trust and offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and the Information Technology Act. The State …

Vijay KumarversusThe State of Bihar

BAIL GRANTED

Vijay Kumar was arrested on 16‑04‑2025 in connection with a kidnapping case (FIR dated 13‑04‑2025) and charged under several sections of the Indian Penal Code, the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act and the Information Technology Act. The petitioner contended that he was falsely implicated, noting that …

Rashid JamalversusThe State of Bihar

BAIL GRANTED

Rashid Jamal was implicated in a cyber‑crime case (Cyber P.S. Case No. 132 of 2025) for alleged offences under several sections of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita and the Information Technology Act, based primarily on the statement of co‑accused Ashik Jamal. The petitioner contended that he was …

ROHIT @ SHIVAM SANJIV PANNALAL RATHODversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

38-RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @ FH

The High Court of Gujarat considered an application for regular bail filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 by Rohit @ Shivam Sanjiv Pannalal Rathod, who was charged under Sections 318(4), 54 and 61 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 66-D of the …

Rahul KumarversusThe State of Bihar

DISMISSED

Rahul Kumar applied for anticipatory bail after being implicated in a case (PS No. 164 of 2025) for supplying fake SIM cards and mobile phones used in cyber fraud. The investigation, based on statements of co‑accused, linked him to offences under several sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 …

SUBODH KUMAR GAMIversusThe State of Bihar

DISMISSED

The petitioner, Subodh Kumar Gami, applied for regular bail in a cyber‑fraud case (Sitamarhi Cyber P.S. Case No. 21 of 2025) involving offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and the Information Technology Act. The charges include sections 318(4), 319(2), 336(3), 338, 340(2), 111(2) of the …

SHUBHAM SINGLA S/O. RAKESH KUMARversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

38-RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @ FH

The applicant, Shubham Singla, sought regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in connection with a cyber‑fraud case registered under multiple sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and the Information Technology Act. The State opposed bail, citing the …

NARESHKUMAR DHANRAJBHAI KHARASANversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

38-RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @ FH

The High Court of Gujarat considered an application for regular bail filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) by Nareshkumar Dhanrajbhai Kharasan, who was arrested in connection with a cyber gaming fraud alleged under Sections 318(4), 61(2), 317(4) of the Bharatiya …

AMIT MAHINDARSINGH SONIversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

38-RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @ FH

The applicant Amit Mahindrasinh Soni filed a regular bail application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in connection with an FIR alleging offences under IPC sections 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 and IT Act Section 66(D). The State opposed bail, arguing the seriousness of …

Aman Kumar Paswan @ Aman PaswanversusThe State of Bihar

BAIL GRANTED

The petitioners, Aman Kumar Paswan, Lalan Paswan and Dipa Devi, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case registered under several provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and the Information Technology Act. The FIR alleged that vulgar photographs of a minor were edited and circulated on …

MONIKA HIMANSHU SAINIversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

38-RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @ FH

The applicant, Monika Himanshu Saini, sought anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) in connection with an FIR registered for multiple offences under the BNSS and the Information Technology Act. The applicant, who is the sister of a company director, …

Md. Sher AliversusThe State of Bihar

DISMISSED

Md. Sher Ali, the petitioner, applied for bail fearing arrest in a POCSO trial (No. 63 of 2024) arising from a case registered at Siwan Cyber Police Station. The prosecution alleges that he took nude photographs of a 12‑year‑old girl and circulated them, invoking Sections 67A and 67B of the …

Sonu RajversusThe State of Bihar

DISMISSED

The petitioner, Sonu Raj, was arrested in connection with a cyber‑crime case (Nalanda Cyber P.S. Case No. 69 of 2025) for alleged offences under multiple sections of the BNS and the Information Technology Act. The prosecution alleged that three mobile phones and other incriminating material were …

Raja Kumar @ RajaramversusThe State of Bihar

BAIL GRANTED

The petitioner, Raja Kumar, was named in an FIR for multiple offences under the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and the Information Technology Act, based on information obtained from co-accused who were apprehended during a raid. No incriminating material was recovered from the petitioner’s possession, …

Nripendra Kumar SIngh @ Nipendra SinghversusThe State of Bihar

ALLOWED

The appellants, parents of the alleged co-accused, appealed against an order of the Special Judge (SC/ST) that took cognizance of offences under IPC sections 341, 323, 376 and 385, as well as sections of the SC/ST Act and the IT Act. They contended that the FIR contained no allegation against them …

Akhilesh SinghversusThe State of Bihar

BAIL REJECTED

The petitioner, Akhilesh Singh, sought anticipatory bail after being implicated in a FIR alleging sexual assault of a 17‑year‑old minor, along with offences under the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, the IT Act and the POCSO Act. The petitioner claimed the case was false, citing contradictions between the …

Sujeet KumarversusThe State of Bihar

BAIL GRANTED

The petitioner, Sujeet Kumar, was arrested in connection with a case registered under Sections 305(c), 317(2&4) and 111 read with Section 3(5) of the BNS, and Sections 66(c) and 66(d) of the Information Technology Act, for allegedly withdrawing Rs. 40,000 from an informant’s bank account after …

Sabita Kumari, Bhumiharin @ Kumari SwetaversusThe State Of Bihar

ALLOWED

The appellant, an editor of a YouTube news channel, was charged under IPC Section 295A, the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and the IT Act for using the terms “Harijan, Harijan Act” which the prosecution alleged hurt the sentiments of the Scheduled Caste/Tribe community. The Special Judge had …

MEET RATILAL SHRIMALIversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

38-RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @ FH

Meet Ratilal Shrimali applied for regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for alleged offences under Sections 318(4), 317(4), 61(2) of the BNSS and Section 66(D) of the Information Technology Act. The applicant claimed innocence, cited that the investigation …

Manoj KumarversusThe State of Bihar

DISMISSED

Manoj Kumar petitioned for bail in a case registered at Sheikhpura Cyber Police Station for alleged cyber fraud involving fake SIM cards and the "Dhani Fast Loans" app. He is charged under multiple sections of the B.N.S. and Sections 66C and 66D of the Information Technology Act. The petitioner has …

Nand Kishore Mehata @ Nand Kishore MehtaversusThe State of Bihar

BAIL GRANTED

Petitioner No.1, a 71‑year‑old senior citizen with a clean record, sought anticipatory bail after the FIR alleged offences under Sections 74, 351(2), 352, 308(1), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Section 67 of the IT Act, stemming from a complaint that his son had installed a spy‑camera and …

Manoj KumarversusThe State of Bihar

BAIL GRANTED

Manoj Kumar was arrested in connection with a case alleging that he hired a scholar to impersonate him in the NEET examination, invoking several offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and the Information Technology Act. The petitioner contended that he did not procure or facilitate any …

Md. Mohsin Alam @ Md. Mohsin @ SonuversusThe State of Bihar

DISMISSED

The petitioner, Md. Mohsin Alam, sought regular bail in a case arising from a police raid on a CSP centre where he was alleged to have been involved in illegal Aadhaar-related activities. The police recovered a laptop, biometric devices, and Aadhaar enrollment documents, and the petitioner attempted …

Sonu KumarversusThe State of Bihar

DISMISSED

The Patna High Court considered a bail application filed by Sonu Kumar, who was arrested in connection with a cyber fraud case (Nalanda P.S. Case No. 90/2026) involving alleged deception in the sale of cement at below‑market rates. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner, along with co‑accused, …

Pankaj Kumar @ Pankaj Kumar GuptaversusThe State of Bihar

BAIL REJECTED

Petitioner Pankaj Kumar Gupta was arrested in connection with a cyber‑crime FIR alleging that he photographed and filmed an intimate relationship with the informant Ishita Kumari and forwarded the material to her prospective in‑laws, causing the marriage to collapse and the videos to go viral. The …

Rahul KumarversusThe State of Bihar

BAIL REJECTED

Petitioners Rahul Kumar and Kundan Kumar applied for anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case registered under multiple provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and the Information Technology Act. The FIR alleged that they were involved in a cyber‑crime and had fled the scene, with the …

Rakesh KumarversusThe State of Bihar

BAIL GRANTED

Rakesh Kumar was arrested in connection with a kidnapping case (Runnisaidpur P.S. Case No. 488 of 2021) originally filed under Sections 366 and 34 of the IPC, later amended to include Sections 504, 506 and Section 6(E) of the IT Act. The victim, the informant's daughter, alleged that Kumar abducted …

Birendra Chaudhary @ Virerdra ChaudharyversusThe State of Bihar

DISMISSED

The petitioner, Birendra Chaudhary, was arrested in connection with a fraud case registered as Bhagalpur Cyber P.S. Case No. 29 of 2026, wherein he is alleged to have cheated Rs. 47,61,000 by promising a franchise to Zudio. The charges include offences under Sections 319(2), 318(4), 338 of the …

Tuntun PrasadversusThe State of Bihar

BAIL GRANTED

The petitioners, Tuntun Prasad and his son Niranjan Kumar, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case registered under Sections 318(4), 319(2), 61(2), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Sections 66(C) and 66(D) of the Information Technology Act. They claimed the underlying dispute had …

Sandip KumarversusThe State of Bihar

ALLOWED

The petitioner, Sandip Kumar, was arrested in connection with a cyber‑fraud case where a mobile number linked to him was alleged to have been used to create a fake Instagram ID and cheat a person of Rs.1,75,000. The prosecution charged him under several sections of the B.N.S. and Sections 66(C) and …

Prem Kumar @ Purushottam KumarversusThe State of Bihar

REJECTED

Prem Kumar was arrested in connection with a Mahila Police Station case alleging that he forced a woman into sexual relations, threatened her with obscene photographs, and later blackmailed her by sending such material to her in‑laws. The FIR, filed on 10 March 2026, charges him under Sections 64, …

Sunni Kumar @ Sanni Kumar @ Sanni Kumar ThakurversusThe State of Bihar

BAIL GRANTED

The petitioner, Sunni Kumar, was arrested in connection with a 2023 case alleging that he captured and circulated obscene photographs of a female informant and threatened her, invoking Sections 354 and 506 of the IPC and Section 66A of the IT Act. The petitioner contended that the alleged incident …

Sunil Kumar @ Sunil Kumar Kamati @ Sunil Kumar KamtiversusThe State of Bihar

BAIL REJECTED

The petitioner, Sunil Kumar, sought pre‑arrest bail after being implicated in a FIR alleging offences under the Bihar National Security Act, the Aadhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and Other Services) Act, 2016, and the Information Technology Act. The FIR arose from a raid on a photostat shop …

Md. ManirversusThe State of Bihar

BAIL GRANTED

The petitioner, Sunni Kumar, was arrested in connection with a 2023 case alleging that he captured and circulated obscene photographs of a female informant and threatened her, invoking Sections 354 and 506 of the IPC and Section 66A of the IT Act. The petitioner contended that the alleged incident …

Gaurav KumarversusThe State of Bihar

BAIL GRANTED

The petitioner, Gaurav Kumar, a NEET examination aspirant, was arrested on charges under multiple sections of the Bihar Negotiable Service Act, 2023 and the Information Technology Act for allegedly arranging a scribe to appear in the exam on his behalf. The prosecution alleged that the scribe did …

Sonu Kumar Roy @ Sonu KumarversusThe State of Bihar

DISMISSED

The petitioner, Sonu Kumar Roy, was charged under multiple sections of the IPC, the POCSO Act and the IT Act for allegedly raping a victim in a maize field, assaulting her, and producing an obscene video. He has been in custody since April 24, 2024 and applied for regular bail. The prosecution …

Gauri ShankarversusThe State of Bihar

BAIL REJECTED

The petitioner, Gauri Shankar, sought anticipatory bail after learning that a case (PS No.99 of 2022) had been registered against him for offences under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468 of the IPC and Sections 66(C), 66(D) of the IT Act. The prosecution’s case is based on a raid in which co‑accused …

Vinayak KumarversusThe State of Bihar

DISMISSED

Vinayak Kumar petitioned the Patna High Court for regular bail in a case registered under Sections 303(2) and 318(4) of the Bihar Negotiable Instruments Act and Sections 66(C) and 66(D) of the Information Technology Act, alleging a fraud of Rs. 2,30,000. The prosecution alleged that Kumar, along …

Harish Kumar @ Irish @ Irish KumarversusThe State of Bihar

DISMISSED

The petitioner, Harish Kumar, applied for regular bail in a case registered under Sections 319(2), 318(2) and 61(2) of the B.N.S. and Sections 66(C) and 66(D) of the Information Technology Act, alleging involvement in cyber fraud. He claimed innocence, a clean antecedent, and had been in custody …

Minta DeviversusThe State of Bihar

BAIL GRANTED

Minta Devi, mother of a co-accused in a cyber‑crime case, filed a bail petition fearing arrest under sections 303(2), 319(2), 318(4) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita and sections 66C, 66D of the Information Technology Act. She asserted that she had not committed any offence, had a clean …

Mohit Raj @ Romi @ RomioversusThe State of Bihar

REJECTED

The petitioner, Mohit Raj, was arrested on 17 January 2026 in connection with a cyber‑fraud case (Motihari Cyber P.S. Case No. 13 of 2026) and charged under several sections of the Bihar Negotiable Instruments Act (BNS) and Sections 66(C) and 66(D) of the Information Technology Act. The prosecution …

Ashok MandalversusThe State of Bihar

ALLOWED

Ashok Mandal was arrested in connection with a cyber‑crime case involving alleged online purchase of gold worth Rs.13.20 lakh, alleged misuse of a rented car and a confessional statement. He was charged under Sections 319(2), 318(4), 338 of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act, 2023 and Sections 66(c) …

PADHIAR HARDEEPSINH KUMARSINHversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

38-RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @ FH

The applicant, Padhiar HardeepSinh Kumarsinh, filed an anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) fearing arrest in connection with an FIR alleging offences under the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita and the Information Technology Act. The State opposed …

Sudhir Pandit @ Sudhir Kumar PanditversusThe State Of Bihar

BAIL GRANTED

Sudhir Pandit was arrested in connection with a 2020 case alleging cheating, defamation, sexual assault, and cyber‑cheating under IPC sections 420, 499, 500, 354(C) and IT Act section 66(D). The allegations stem from his purported friendship with the informant’s sister, false claims about his caste, …

Arbind Singh @ Arvind Kumar SinghversusThe State of Bihar

ALLOWED

Arbind Singh was arrested on allegations of creating fake social media accounts to defame an informant's daughter and disrupt her marriage, invoking sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and the Information Technology Act. The petitioner contended that the case was fabricated due to a matrimonial …

Satyam Saurabh @ SatyamversusThe State of Bihar

WITHDRAWN

The petitioner, Satyam Saurabh, faced an anticipatory bail application in connection with a cyber‑crime case involving offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and the Information Technology Act. He feared arrest and sought permission to withdraw the anticipatory bail application, requesting …

Prakash KumarversusThe State of Bihar

REJECTED

Petitioner Prakash Kumar was arrested on 16 January 2026 in connection with a cyber‑fraud case (Cyber P.S. Case No. 05 of 2026) alleging that he purchased a mule account and used it via UPI/Internet banking to defraud victims. He is charged under several provisions of the Bihar Non‑Statutory (BNS) …

Suraj KumarversusThe State of Bihar

REJECTED

Suraj Kumar was arrested on 14 March 2026 in connection with a case alleging that he participated in a cyber‑crime scheme advertising cheap‑interest loans, violating several sections of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act, 2023 and the Information Technology Act. The prosecution claimed that a UCO …

Devpujan Yadav @ Devpujan RayversusThe State of Bihar

ALLOWED

Sonu Kumar was arrested on charges of assaulting police officers and possession of two mobile phones, a SIM card and two ATM cards, alleged to be recovered during a police raid. He faces charges under Sections 115(2), 117(2), 318(4), 132, 111 and 3(5) of the B.N.S. and Section 66(D) of the …

Vikash Kumar @ ChhotuversusThe State of Bihar

BAIL GRANTED

Vikash Kumar, proprietor of Niku Mobile Shop, was arrested on charges of supplying SIM cards used in a cyber fraud, under multiple provisions of the B.N.S, the Telecommunication Act, 2023 and the Information Technology Act. The petitioner contended that he merely sold SIMs in the ordinary course of …

Pradip KumarversusThe State of Bihar

BAIL GRANTED

The petitioner, Pradip Kumar, was arrested for allegedly facilitating a cyber‑crime network by transferring Rs 11,000 to an account used for fraud, and was charged under Section 318(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Sections 66(c) and 66(d) of the Information Technology Act. The petitioner …

Raj jayswal @ Chhotu Killa @ Devraj JayswalversusThe State of Bihar

BAIL GRANTED

The petitioner, Raj Jayswal, was charged under several sections of the BNS and the Information Technology Act for allegedly exploiting an informant, blackmailing her, and uploading her nude and obscene videos on social media. The petitioner contended that the relationship with the informant was …

KULDEEP S/O. BALVANTSINH FATEHSINH CHAUHANversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

58-RULE ISSUED & RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @FH

The High Court of Gujarat considered an application for regular bail filed by Kuldeep under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita after a chargesheet was filed for offences under Sections 316(5), 318(4), 336(3), 338, 340(2), 61(2) of the BNSS and Sections 66(c) and 66(d) of the Information …

GHANSHYAMBHAI BHUPATBHAI BARAIYAversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

58-RULE ISSUED & RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @FH

The applicant, Ghanshyambhai Bhupatbhai Baraiya, was detained on 2 May 2026 in connection with an FIR registered at the Cyber Crime Police Station, Ahmedabad, alleging offences under Sections 319(2), 61(2)(a) and 54 of the B.N.S. and Sections 66(d) and 43(b) of the Information Technology Act. He …

BUDHRAM KESHAVRAM BENIVALversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

46-ANY OTHER MODE @ FH

The petitioners filed a Special Criminal Application under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking to quash FIR No.11210064260585 registered for multiple offences, including non‑compoundable ones under the BNS and the Information Technology Act. Both the de facto …

KARAN @ D. K. NAGDANBHAI DAVversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

58-RULE ISSUED & RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @FH

The applicant, Karan @ D.K. Nagdanbhai Dav, was arrested on 16‑12‑2025 in connection with FIR C.R. No.11203030250977 for alleged offences under Sections 317(2), 317(4) and 54 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Section 66(D) of the Information Technology Act. He filed a regular bail application under …

Badal KumarversusThe State of Bihar

REJECTED

Badal Kumar petitioned for anticipatory bail after the police alleged his involvement in a cyber‑fraud scheme investigated under Sections 318(4), 112 and 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023 and Sections 66(C) and 66(D) of the Information Technology Act. The prosecution’s case is based on statements of …

Parvej AlamversusThe State of Bihar

BAIL GRANTED

The petitioner, Parvej Alam, was arrested on 10 January 2026 for publishing communal posts on Facebook and charged under Sections 196(1) and 197(1) of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act and Sections 67 and 67(A) of the Information Technology Act. He applied for regular bail, claiming innocence and …

Ritesh MahtoversusThe State of Bihar

BAIL GRANTED

Ritesh Mahto was arrested in a rape case (Section 64 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023) and for allegedly publishing a pornographic video (Section 67(A) of the Information Technology Act). He filed a second bail application after an earlier denial, claiming he was falsely implicated due to a …

Chotu KumarversusThe State of Bihar

BAIL GRANTED

Chotu Kumar was arrested in connection with a case alleging that he posted private photographs of a woman on Facebook using a fake ID after she refused to marry him, violating Sections 74, 75, 351(2) and 352(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 66(E) and 67(A) of the Information …

Ram Udesh KumarversusThe State of Bihar

BAIL REJECTED

Ram Udesh Kumar was charged under several provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Section 66E of the Information Technology Act for uploading objectionable photographs of an informant's daughter on social media and threatening the informant, actions which allegedly led to the informant's …

Sweta DeviversusThe State of Bihar

DISPOSED

Sweta Devi and her husband Badal Kumar sought anticipatory bail in a case alleging offences under Sections 77 and 3(5) of the B.N.S.S and Section 67(A) of the Information Technology Act. The informant, who is in a matrimonial and property dispute with Sweta, claimed the petitioners filmed her while …

SURAJ KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P.

The Allahabad High Court entertained bail application No. 37510 of 2025 filed by Suraj Kumar under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in connection with offences under Sections 123, 309(4), 61(2) of the same Act and Section 66‑D of the Information Technology Act. The …

Jarina KhatoonversusThe State of Bihar

BAIL GRANTED

Jarina Khatoon was charged under Sections 67A and 67B of the Information Technology Act, Section 61(2) of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act, and Sections 14 and 15 of the POCSO Act for allegedly taking nude photographs of a 12‑year‑old girl and circulating them. Her earlier bail application was …

BRIJ MOHAN KUMARversusThe State of Bihar

DISMISSED

The petitioner, Brij Mohan Kumar, was arrested on allegations of committing cyber fraud by using social media platforms to lure victims into fraudulent investment schemes, violating several provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and the Information Technology Act. He applied for regular …

Satyendra PaswanversusThe State of Bihar

BAIL REJECTED

The petitioners, Satyendra Paswan and Yashpal Paswan, were arrested by the Sheikhpura Cyber Police Station in connection with a case alleging involvement in a cyber gang that possessed a large quantity of fake materials. They applied for bail, contending that the charges were under Sections 318(2), …

Krishna KumarversusThe State of Bihar

DISMISSED

Krishna Kumar appealed against the order of the District & Additional Sessions Judge that denied his request for anticipatory bail in a case involving alleged cyber offences, including posting obscene material and caste‑based abusive language on Facebook. The FIR alleged that several fake Facebook …

Ankit KumarversusThe State of Bihar

BAIL GRANTED

Ankit Kumar applied for regular bail for offences under several sections of the Bihar Negotiable Instruments Act and the Information Technology Act. The prosecution alleged that the accused killed the informant's son over a money dispute, but the petitioner’s name does not appear in the FIR; it only …

AJIT YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Ajit Yadav under Section 483 BNSS in a case involving alleged violations of the Banning of Unregulated Deposit Schemes Act and the Information Technology Act. The applicant claimed he was falsely implicated, asserting that the recovered mobile …

ANISH AHMADversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, on behalf of Anish Ahmad, who was implicated in a cyber‑fraud case (Crime No. 19 of 2025) involving sections 308(2), 318(4), 319(2), 61(2) of the same Act and sections 66 and 66D of …

Md. SawezversusThe State of Bihar

BAIL GRANTED

The petitioners, Md. Sawez and Md. Chand, sought bail in a case (N.H. Bangra P.S. No.138 of 2025) alleging offences of rape, criminal intimidation, and obscene video under IPC and the IT Act. They argued that the FIR was lodged three years after the alleged incident, was motivated by a land dispute, …

Abhinav MaisiversusThe State of Bihar

ALLOWED

The petitioner, Abhinav Maisi, was arrested in connection with a case alleging creation of a fake account and Facebook ID used to cheat victims, charged under several sections of the B.N.S. and the Information Technology Act. He contended that he was innocent, that the SIM card in his name was …

Dilip KumarversusThe State of Bihar

DISMISSED

The petitioner, Dilip Kumar, sought regular bail in a cyber‑crime case registered under Sections 318(4), 61(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 66C of the IT Act. The prosecution alleged that he opened a current bank account, allowed a co‑accused to operate it, and …

VIVEK KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Vivek Kumar filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition in the Allahabad High Court challenging an FIR dated 23‑03‑2026 registered under Section 318(4) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 66‑D of the Information Technology Act. During the hearing the petitioner withdrew his original relief but …

ANKIT BHARDWAJ AND 10 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicants filed an application under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita seeking to quash the criminal proceedings (Case No. 227001 of 2022) pending before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Varanasi, which involved offences under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120 of the …

KISHAN KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P.

Kishan Kumar was arrested in connection with a case (Crime No. 164 of 2025) alleging that he posted indecent photographs of a victim on Instagram, invoking Sections 69, 84, 351(3) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 67 of the Information Technology Act. The applicant contended that he is innocent, …

ANUJ TOMARversusSTATE OF U.P.

The Allahabad High Court considered the bail application of Anuj Tomar, who is charged under IPC sections 69, 125, 308(8), 352, 351(2) and IT Act section 67 for allegedly deceiving a woman with a false promise of marriage, recording indecent acts and posting them on social media. The prosecution …

Mithun Kumar Sharma @ Mithun SharmaversusThe State of Bihar

ALLOWED

Mithun Kumar Sharma filed an anticipatory bail application fearing arrest in a cyber‑crime case (Aurangabad Cyber P.S. Case No. 51 of 2025) involving offences under Sections 318(4), 303(2), 319(2), 336(2), 336(3), 338, 111 of the B.N.S. and Sections 66(c) and 66(d) of the Information Technology Act. …

Ravi Ranjan KumarversusThe State of Bihar

ALLOWED

Ravi Ranjan Kumar was implicated in a cyber‑crime FIR (Warsaliganj PS Case No.374 of 2025) under multiple sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and the I.T. Act, based solely on the statement of a co‑accused seized during a police raid. No incriminating material was recovered from Kumar’s …

Surendra Kumar @ Buddu Kumar @ Baddu KumarversusThe State of Bihar

REJECTED

Surendra Kumar was arrested on 7 March 2026 in connection with a POCSO case alleging rape of a minor. He applied for regular bail, claiming the FIR was fabricated. The State opposed, noting that his anticipatory bail had been denied and the Supreme Court dismissed his SLP, directing surrender. The …

Firoz Alam @ Firoj Sah @ Firoz ShahversusThe State of Bihar

BAIL GRANTED

The petitioner, Firoz Alam, was arrested in connection with a case alleging rape under IPC Section 376(D) and the publication of obscene material under IT Act Sections 67 and 67(A). The prosecution alleges that the petitioner and a co‑accused sexually assaulted the victim, recorded the act, …

RAJ SHANTILAL PATELversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, on behalf of Raj Shantilal Patel, who was arrested in a cyber‑fraud case (Crime No.06 of 2024) involving IPC offences (384, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120‑B) and IT Act offences (66‑C, …

AMIR ANSARIversusSTATE OF UP AND ANOTHER

The applicant, Amir Ansari, filed a petition under Section 528 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking to quash the order dated 5 March 2021 that framed charges against him in a trial for offences under Sections 376, 354‑D, 506 of the IPC and Section 67 of the IT Act. The petition was filed on 8 …

ARJUN THAKURversusSTATE OF U.P.

Arjun Thakur applied for bail in a criminal case (Crime No.56 of 2026) where he was implicated based on statements of co‑accused. He argued that the allegations were false, there was no independent witness, and the recovered items did not link him to any offence. The State opposed bail but could not …

AMIT GANGWARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Amit Gangwar was charged under sections of the BNS Act, the POCSO Act, and the IT Act for alleged sexual offences. After two earlier bail applications were denied, he filed a third bail petition claiming the parties had settled the matter and would marry. The State opposed, highlighting that the …

PAWAN KUMAR YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 on behalf of Pawan Kumar Yadav, who was arrested in a cyber‑fraud case involving Sections 3(5), 318(4), 336(3), 338, 340(2) of the BNS and Section 66D of the IT Act. The FIR alleged …

PIYUSH TRIVEDIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicant, Piyush Trivedi, filed an application under Section 528 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking to quash the criminal proceedings (Criminal Case No. 6421 of 2020) pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Etawah, which involved offences under IPC Sections 153A and …

SOHILversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed on behalf of Sohil, who is charged in Crime No. 27 of 2025 under several sections of the Indian Penal Code and the Information Technology Act. The applicant argued that he is not named in the FIR, has no prior convictions, and has been in custody …

Chandan YadavversusThe State of Bihar

ALLOWED

The petitioner, Chandan Yadav, sought bail for offences under Sections 25, 7, 27 of the Arms Act and Section 66(c) of the Information Technology Act, alleging that he was identified solely through a viral video showing illegal firearms and that no weapon was recovered from him. The prosecution …

ASHOK KUMAR AHIRWARversusSTATE OF U.P.

Ashok Kumar Ahirwar, charged with rape and related offences under Sections 376(1), 328, 323, 342, 506 IPC and Section 67 IT Act, had been in judicial custody for over three and a half years while only three of six prosecution witnesses had been examined. The applicant sought bail, arguing that his …

SHIV MANGALversusSTATE OF U.P.

Shiv Mangal, a 72‑year‑old retired teacher, was arrested in a case involving alleged misappropriation of an excess pension amount of Rs.5,37,408 and charged under several sections of the Indian Penal Code and Section 66(D) of the IT Act. He contended that the excess amount was inadvertently credited …

RAVI KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P.

Ravi Kumar was charged under IPC sections 452, 376, 506, 507 and IT Act section 67 for allegedly posting an indecent video of the victim on Facebook. He filed three successive bail applications, each asserting innocence, delay in FIR filing, and cooperation with the trial. The State opposed bail, …

MD WASIversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for Md. Wasi, who was arrested in connection with a fraud case involving alleged impersonation and fraudulent sale deeds under Sections 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2) of the BNS and …

VIKAS BABUversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicant, Vikas Babu, filed an application under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S. seeking to quash the charge‑sheet and cognizance order in Sessions Trial No. 14 of 2025, which alleged offences under IPC sections 323, 342, 504, 506, 376D and IT Act section 67. He contended that the FIR was lodged …

MOHD SALMANversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicant, Mohd Salman, filed an application under Section 528 of the BNSS seeking to quash the criminal proceedings (Criminal Case No. 38472 of 2023) arising from offences under IPC Section 420 and IT Act Sections 66 and 66D. He argued that he had not been arrested and that the charge‑sheet had …

JEETU @ JITESHversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicant, Jeetu @ Jitesh, was arrested in a case under Sections 64, 351(3) of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 66‑E, 67‑A of the Information Technology Act for allegedly possessing and circulating an indecent video of a victim. The applicant contended that no video had been recovered and that …

RAMANversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The High Court of Allahabad considered an anticipatory bail application filed by Raman under Section 482 of the CrPC in connection with alleged offences under IPC sections 318(4), 111(2), 61(2) and Section 66D of the Information Technology Act. The applicant claimed he was falsely implicated, …

ROCKYversusSTATE OF U.P.

The applicant, Rocky, sought bail in a criminal case (Cr. No. 0068 of 2025) alleging that he recorded an indecent video of a married woman and threatened to circulate it. The prosecution presented the victim’s statement and a video recovered from the applicant’s mobile, asserting the allegations are …

Amarjeet KumarversusThe State of Bihar

BAIL GRANTED

Amarjeet Kumar was arrested on allegations of hacking a departmental portal and illegally preparing ration cards, based largely on a co-accused's confessional statement. He has been in custody since 24 October 2025 and contends he has a clean antecedent and that the seizure of his laptop and mobile …

Sachin KumarversusThe State of Bihar

BAIL GRANTED

The Patna High Court considered a bail application filed by Sachin Kumar, who had been in custody since 7 December 2025 in connection with Cyber P.S. Case No. 64 of 2025 arising from an FIR dated 6 December 2025. The FIR alleged offences under sections 303(2), 318(4), 319(2) of the Bihar Narcotic …

Dilkhush MandalversusThe State of Bihar

DISMISSED

The petitioner, Dilkhush Mandal, sought regular bail in a case involving multiple offences under the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act, the POCSO Act and the IT Act, alleging kidnapping and sexual assault of a minor. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner abducted the informant's minor daughter and …

NAVALKISHOR @ NAVAL KISHOR GARGversusSTATE OF U.P.

Navalkishor Garg, an 80‑year‑old man, was charged under several sections of the Uttar Pradesh B.N.S. Act and Section 66‑D of the Information Technology Act for allegedly receiving an excess pension of Rs. 22,08,285, of which Rs. 4,96,000 had already been recovered. The applicant filed a second bail …

GOPAL PRASAD GOSWAMIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicant filed an application under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking to quash charge‑sheet No. 1019 of 2018 in State v. Gopal Prasad Goswami and others, which alleged offences under various IPC and IT Act provisions. The High Court examined the material and held that, at the …

CHANDAN SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The Allahabad High Court considered an anticipatory bail application filed under Section 482 of the CrPC by Chandan Singh, who was implicated in a case (Crime No. 931 of 2018) involving alleged offences under Sections 409, 417, 120‑B IPC and 66‑C of the IT Act, arising from a complaint under the …

VIVEK SHRIVASversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, on behalf of Vivek Shrivas, who was charged under Sections 319(2) and 318(4) of the same Act and Sections 66C and 66D of the Information Technology Act for alleged receipt and …

RAMBABUversusSTATE OF U.P.

The High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, on behalf of Rambabu, who was arrested in a cyber‑fraud case (Crime No. 113 of 2025) involving IPC offences (420, 468, 471, 120‑B) and IT Act offences (66C, 66D). The applicant …

RANVEER KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P.

Ranveer Kumar was arrested in connection with a cyber‑crime case (Crime No. 11 of 2025) based solely on information from an informer, although his name does not appear in the FIR. The applicant contended that the mobile number and alleged transaction attributed to him were false, and that there was …

JABIR ALIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicant filed an application under Section 528 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking to quash criminal proceedings (Criminal Case No. 784 of 2018) arising under Sections 66-D, 66-E and 67 of the Information Technology Act. The court noted that the charge‑sheet had already been …

Manoj DasversusThe State of Bihar

BAIL GRANTED

Manoj Das, a 20‑year‑old resident of Jharkhand, was charged under Sections 318(4), 319(2) of the Bihar Negotiable Securities Act, Sections 66, 66(C), 66(D) of the Information Technology Act and Sections 336(3), 337 and 338 of the same Act. He applied for bail after an earlier bail application was …

Rajnikant KumarversusThe State of Bihar

ALLOWED

Rajnikant Kumar was arrested in a cyber‑fraud case involving alleged cheating of Rs 8,11,927 through a PhonePe scam, charged under IPC sections 419 and 420 and IT Act sections 66(c) and 66(d). The prosecution alleged that the complainant’s money was siphoned via an app suggested by PhonePe customer …

MUKESH KUMARversusThe State of Bihar

ALLOWED

The petitioner, Mukesh Kumar, challenged the order of cognizance dated 16‑07‑2018 taken by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patna, under Section 498‑A IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The FIR was filed by his wife shortly after he filed a divorce petition, alleging …

Kasish RajversusThe State of Bihar

BAIL GRANTED

The petitioners, two sisters from Gaya, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case (Civil Line PS‑282/2023) alleging offences under IPC sections 354‑B, 506 and 509, IT Act sections 66(c) and 66(d) and POCSO Act section 14(1). The FIR alleged that their brother Anuraj used their mobile phones …

Sourav Kumar Sah @ Sourav KumarversusThe State of Bihar

BAIL REJECTED

The petitioners, Sourav Kumar Sah and Gaurav Kumar Sah, applied for anticipatory bail fearing arrest in connection with FIR No.207/2024, which alleges offences under IPC sections 341, 323, 354A, 385, 506 and IT Act section 66(c). The informant alleges that a person named Shubham kidnapped her …

MOHAMMAD AFTAB S/O DILSHADversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Disposed Off

Mohammad Aftab applied for regular bail in a case involving alleged insurance fraud amounting to Rs.33,39,418, charged under Sections 318(4), 319,3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 66-D of the Information Technology Act. The prosecution alleged that Aftab, together with co‑accused, …

Pawan Kumar Pandey @ Pawan PandeyversusThe State of Bihar

DISMISSED

Petitioner Pawan Kumar Pandey applied for regular bail in a case registered under multiple sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, along with provisions of the POCSO Act and the IT Act, alleging involvement in a gang rape. The State opposed the bail, asserting that prima facie material …

Sonu Chaudhary @ Sonu Kumar @ Amit RanjanversusThe State of Bihar

BAIL REJECTED

The petitioner, Sonu Chaudhary, was implicated in a FIR alleging that he, along with a co‑accused, extorted money by coercing a student to record an inappropriate video of a teacher and later threatened to publish the video unless she complied with further demands. The FIR charges under Sections 76, …

Rakesh KumarversusThe State of Bihar

BAIL GRANTED

The petitioner, Rakesh Kumar, applied for bail in a case registered under Sections 376 and 504 of the IPC, Sections 6 and 8 of the POCSO Act, and Section 67 of the IT Act. The prosecution alleges that he committed rape, while the petitioner contends he is innocent, asserting that he is married to …