Patna High Court
Sri Ram KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- SANDEEP KUMAR
Holding
The Court held that bail could not be granted because the nature and gravity of the alleged cyber‑fraud, coupled with the petitioner’s self‑inculpatory statement, warranted continued custody.
Summary
The petitioner, Ram Kumar, was arrested in July 2025 in connection with a cyber‑fraud case (Nawada Cyber P.S. Case No. 102 of 2025) under multiple offences of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. He applied for regular bail for the second time, contending that he is a gentleman and was arrested in a high‑handed manner. The prosecution produced evidence that a raid on his village recovered three mobile phones and the petitioner gave a self‑inculpatory statement admitting participation in the fraud. The learned counsel for the State opposed bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the offences. The Court examined the nature and gravity of the alleged cyber‑fraud and the petitioner’s admission, and found no sufficient ground to grant bail. Consequently, the application for regular bail was dismissed, reaffirming the earlier order.
Issues considered
- Whether regular bail can be granted to an accused of cyber fraud under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 considering the nature and gravity of the offences.
- Whether the petitioner’s self‑inculpatory statement and the recovery of material evidence preclude the grant of bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 111, 303(2), 317(2), 317(5), 318(2), 318(4), 319(2), 336(2), 336(3), 338, 340(2), 3(5), 61(2)
Subjects
- bail
- cyber fraud
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- regular bail
- self‑inculpatory statement
- nature and gravity of offence
- Patna High Court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.31559 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-102 Year-2025 Thana- Cyber P.S. District- Nawada
======================================================
Sri Ram Kumar Son of Umesh Singh Resident of vill-Chainpura PS-
Warisaliganj Dist- Nawada
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Deepak Bharti
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Pushpa Sinha.1
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 14-05-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the
learned APP for the State.
2. This is the 2nd attempt of the petitioner seeking bail
in connection with Nawada Cyber P.S. Case No. 102 of 2025
registered for the offence under Sections 303(2), 318(2), 318(4),
319(2), 336(2), 336(3), 338, 340(2), 111, 317(5), 317(2), 61(2)
and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3. Earlier the bail application of the petitioner was
rejected on 10.12.2025 in Cr. Misc. No. 73964 of 2025 which
reads as follows:-
Heard Mr. N.K. Agrswal, learned Senior
Counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in
connection with Nawada Cyber P.S. Case No. 102 of 2025
registered for the offence under Sections 303(2), 318(2),
318(4), 338, 319(2), 336(2), 336(3), 111, 317(5), 317(2),
61(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31559 of 2026(2) dt.14-05-2026
2/2
3. As per the prosecution case, the
petitioner is accused of committing cyber fraud.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner
has vehemently argued and has submitted that the
petitioner is a gentleman and he is not involved in any
crime. He has been arrested by the police in high-
handed manner. The petitioner isin custody since
01.07.2025.
5. The learned counsel for the State has
vehemently opposed the prayer of the petitioner.
6. The police raided the village of the
petitioner, one criminal was caught and thereafter the
petitioner was caught. From the house of the petitioner,
three mobile phones were recovered. The petitioner has
given a self-inculpatory statement that he along with
others is involved in cyber fraud.
7. Considering the aforesaid facts, this Court
is not inclined to grant regular bail to the petitioner.
Accordingly, this application for regular bail stands
rejected.
4. Considering the nature and the gravity of the
offence, this Court finds no ground to review its earlier order.
Accordingly, this application for regular bail stands dismissed.
(Sandeep Kumar, J)
Shishir/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.