Wasim AkramversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10443 of 2026
                   Arising Out of PS. Case No.-24 Year-2025 Thana- Cyber P.S. District- West Champaran
                 ======================================================
                 Wasim Akram S/o Shaid Samsi @ Sayeed Shamsi R/o Mohalla- Nawab
                 Bahadur Road, Patna City, Police Station- Khajekala, District- Patna

                                                                                    ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                        Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr. Krishna Kumar Singh, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr. Kalyan Shankar, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
                                        CAV ORDER

4   21-04-2026                  Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the

                   learned APP for the State.

                                2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection

                   with Cyber (Bagaha) P.S. Case No. 24 of 2025 registered for the

                   offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 338, 112, 336(3),

                   61(2), 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023 and Sections 420, 468, 120B, 34

                   of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 66(C), 66(D) of the I.T.

                   Act.

                                3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that the

                   informant came across an advertisement of Ind Bank Merchant

                   Banking on his Facebook account in which there was assurance

                   of getting more return on investments in the share market. After

                   that, the informant clicked the link. Thereafter, the WhatsApp

                   account of Megha Bhandari with mobile no. 9755638401 was
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10443 of 2026(4) dt.21-04-2026
                                            2/4




          opened on his mobile and he was directed to transfer the amount

          to the account number of Thakre Construction. The informant

          transferred Rs. 49,000/- from his account to the account of

          Thakre Construction and also received a profit of 10%, which

          was apparent from his QIB account. After getting this benefit in

          the share marketing, the informant started investing further on

          the instance of Megha Bhandari. After 15 days, another

          advertisement was shown on his Facebook account, on which

          the informant clicked, and WhatsApp of Yalini Guna with

          mobile no. 9108677256 was opened on his mobile phone. At the

          instance of Yalini Guna, a QIB account was also opened in the

          name of the informant. It has been stated that from 25.09.2025

          to 29.10.2025, the informant transferred a total of Five crore

          seventy five lakhs to the account opened by Megha Bhandari for

          the informant. The informant further transferred Rs. 95,00,000/-

          from 06.10.2025 to 24.12.2025 on QIB Account opened by

          Yalini Guna in the name of the informant. When the informant

          attempted to withdraw his money from the QIB accounts, he

          could not withdraw it and has become the victim of cyber fraud.

                       4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted

          that the petitioner is the director of W.S. Innovatex Private

          Limited and that in his account, altogether Rs. 37,70,000/- was
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10443 of 2026(4) dt.21-04-2026
                                            3/4




          transferred by the informant. Moreover, a statement has been

          made in Paragraph ‘3’ of the petition that petitioner has no

          criminal antecedent and he is languishing in judicial custody

          since 03.12.2025.

                       5. Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed

          the bail and has submitted that a complaint was also filed by the

          petitioner that his mobile phone and checkbook were misused,

          but this conspiracy was revealed when the CDR of his mobile

          number was collected by the police, which is clear from

          Paragraph ‘11’ of the case diary. Petitioner’s mobile was in his

          personal use after the commission of cyber fraud from different

          mobiles, which shows that petitioner’s mobile was not lost,

          rather, it was used with his consent.

                       6. It is an admitted position that a sum of Rs.

          37,00,000/- was transferred to the bank account of the petitioner

          and as per Paragraph ‘31’ of the case diary, the petitioner's

          account was used for transactions of money obtained from

          alleged cyber fraud. Paragraph ‘7’ of the supplementary case

          diary reveals that the petitioner's bank account and SIM card

          were used by co-accused persons for alleged cyber fraud with

          his consent, as he was also offered dividends. The facts that

          have been brought during the investigation goes to show that it
                 Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10443 of 2026(4) dt.21-04-2026
                                                             4/4




                           is not only a case of cyber fraud, rather it is a case of money

                           laundering.

                                        7. Considering the above facts and circumstances of

                           the case, this court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on

                           bail at this stage, however, the petitioner will be at liberty to

                           renew his prayer for bail after six months if the trial is not

                           concluded.

                                        8. Accordingly, the present bail application stands

                           rejected.



                                                          (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
Sudhanshu/-

AFR/NAFR                 NAFR
CAV DATE                 08.04.2026
Uploading Date           21.04.2026
Transmission Date        21.04.2026