Patna High Court

Deepak Kumar@ Dipu KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 9 February 2026
Disposal: BAIL REJECTED
Bench: R P MISHRA

Holding

Anticipatory bail is denied to the petitioner.

Summary

The petitioner, Deepak Kumar, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a cyber‑crime case (PS No. 81 of 2024) involving offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and the Information Technology Act. The prosecution alleged that a police raid recovered mobile phones and data, leading to arrests, and that the petitioner was implicated based on a co‑accused's confessional statement. The petitioner contended that the allegations were vague, no specific overt act was shown, and he had no criminal antecedent. The State opposed bail, asserting involvement in cyber offences. The Court, considering the nature of the offences and the circumstances, refused anticipatory bail but indicated that regular bail could be considered if the petitioner surrenders within six weeks.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner in view of the alleged cyber offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and the IT Act
Whether the prosecution's evidence, primarily a co‑accused's confession, suffices to deny anticipatory bail

Legislation cited

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 111, 303(2), 318(2), 318(4), 319(2), 336(2), 336(3), 338, 340(2), 61(2)
Information Technology Act — s. 66, 66(B), 66(c), 66(d)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
cyber crime
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
IT Act
bail denial
criminal procedure

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.63867 of 2025
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-81 Year-2024 Thana- Cyber P.S. District- Nawada
                 ======================================================
                 Deepak Kumar@ Dipu Kumar Son of Bharat Chaudhari R/o Village -
                 Bheriya, P.S. - Warisaliganj, District - Nawada
                                                                 ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr. Rajesh Kumar Mishra, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr. Mohammad Sufyan, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
                 MISHRA
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   09-02-2026                    Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State.

                               2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection

                   with Cyber P.S. Case No. 81 of 2024 instituted for the offences

                   under Sections 303(2), 318(2), 318(4), 319(2), 338, 336(2),

                   336(3), 340(2), 61(2), 111 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023

                   and Sections 66, 66(B), 66(c), 66(d) of the I.T. Act.

                               3. Prosecution case, in short, is that on tracking

                   suspicious mobile numbers, the police conducted a raid at

                   village Fatha and Bheriya, apprehended several persons,

                   recovered mobile phones and data sheets from their possession,

                   and arrested them for alleged involvement in cyber offences.

                               4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the

                   petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case. The
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.63867 of 2025(3) dt.09-02-2026
                                                       2/2




                     name of the petitioner transpired in this case on the basis of

                     confessional statement of co-accused. Learned counsel for the

                     petitioner submitted that general and omnibus allegation has

                     been made against the petitioner. No specific overt act is alleged

                     against the petitioner. It has been submitted on behalf of the

                     petitioner that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent.

                                 5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently

                     opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner stating that

                     accused persons including the petitioner are involved in Cyber

                     crime.

                                  6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances

                     of the case as also nature of offence, this Court is not inclined to

                     grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

                                  7. Accordingly, the prayer for grant of anticipatory

                     bail to the petitioner is, hereby, rejected.

                                  8. However, if the petitioner surrenders before the

                     learned court below within a period of six weeks from today and

                     prays for regular bail, the same shall be disposed of on its own

                     merit without being prejudiced by this order.



                                           (Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
Alok Verma/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…