Patna High Court

Aashish Raj @ RajaversusThe State Of Bihar

Decided: 9 April 2026
Disposal: DISMISSED
Bench: SANDEEP KUMAR

Holding

The application for regular bail was dismissed.

Summary

The petitioner, Aashish Raj, sought regular bail in a cyber‑crime case (Case No. 33 of 2025) alleging offences under sections 318(2), 319(2), 303(2), 111, 3(5) of the B.N.S. and sections 66(B) and 66(D) of the Information Technology Act. He was identified as a holder of a mule account through which transactions of Rs. 45 lakhs were conducted and has been in custody since 10 September 2025, claiming a clean antecedent and innocence. The State opposed the bail application, arguing the petitioner’s involvement in the alleged crime. The Court, after hearing both sides, dismissed the regular bail application, noting the petitioner’s alleged participation. The Court also directed the Superintendent of Police, Khagaria, to examine whether other mule‑account holders have been improperly made witnesses and to take appropriate action if misconduct is found.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail despite alleged involvement in cyber‑offences under the B.N.S. and IT Act.
Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent and claim of innocence justify bail.

Legislation cited

B.N.S. — s. 111, 303(2), 318(2), 319(2), 3(5)
Information Technology Act, 2000 — s. 66(B), 66(D)

Subjects

bail
cyber crime
mule account
Information Technology Act
regular bail
investigation
witness

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                               CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7148 of 2026
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-33 Year-2025 Thana- Cyber P.S. District- Khagaria
                 ======================================================
                 Aashish Raj @ Raja S/O Arun Sah R/O Vill.- Dharmpur Banni (Banni
                 Dharampur) P.s.- Maheshkhut, District- Khagaria.

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :         Mr. Samrendra Kumar Jha, Advocate

                 For the Opposite Party/s :         Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
                                       ORAL ORDER

4   09-04-2026                   Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and

                   learned APP for the State.

                                 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to

                   make necessary correction in paragraph 4 of the bail petition.

                                 3. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with

                   Cyber P.S. Case No. 33 of 2025 registered for the offence under

                   Sections 318(2), 319(2), 303(2), 111, 3(5) of the B.N.S. & u/s

                   66(B), 66(D) of the I.T. Act.

                                 4. The petitioner is one of the holders of the mule

                   account in which the total transactions of Rs. 45 Lakhs was

                   done.

                                 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner is innocent and has not committed any offence.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7148 of 2026(4) dt.09-04-2026
                                            2/3




          Petitioner is in custody since 10.09.2025 and has clean

          antecedent.

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

          opposed the prayer for bail.

                       7. Considering the fact that the petitioner is involved

          in the alleged crime, this application for regular bail is

          dismissed.

                       8. In course of argument, learned counsel for the

          petitioner has submitted that other mule account holders have

          been deliberately left by the Police by making them witnesses in

          the case. If this is so, this should be brought to the notice of

          Superintendent of Police, Khagaria. The Superintendent of

          Police, Khagaria is directed to look into the records of the case

          and if it is found that similarly situated persons who have

          operated mule account and instead of making them accused are

          being made witnesses then appropriate action should be initiated

          against the Investigating Officer of the case and further

          investigation should be done in accordance with law.

                       9. Let a copy of this order be sent to the

          Superintendent of Police, Khagaria through FAX for its

          forthwith compliance.

                       10. It is made clear that any observation made herein
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7148 of 2026(4) dt.09-04-2026
                                                        3/3




                      is prima facie in nature and limited solely for the purpose of

                      adjudication of the present bail application. Such observations

                      shall not be construed as an expression on the merits of the case

                      and shall not influence the trial or any other proceedings in any

                      manner.


                                                     (Sandeep Kumar, J)

Ranjeet/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…