Patna High Court
Vikash KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The court denied the petitioner's prayer for regular bail.
Summary
Vikash Kumar, an employee of CMS Info System Ltd., was charged under sections 316(2), 316(5), 318(4), 303(2) and 61(2) of the Indian Penal Code for allegedly transporting Rs 20 lakh in a Swift Dzire car to load cash at a State Bank of India ATM in Gandhi Maidan. The prosecution alleged that he and co‑accused Dheeraj Kumar were custodians of cash for ATMs and that Kumar was in possession of the cash. The petitioner claimed innocence, no eyewitnesses, and highlighted that both accused had the van keys and that Dheeraj Kumar had already been granted bail, arguing similar circumstances. The State contended that material in the diary showed Kumar’s direct involvement in moving the cash. After hearing both sides, the court refused to grant regular bail at this stage, allowing a fresh application after six months if the trial remains pending, and directed the trial court to expedite the proceedings.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail despite the seriousness of the offences alleged under sections 316, 318, 303 and 61 of the IPC.
- Whether the material evidence on record justifies denial of bail at the present stage of the investigation.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 303(2), 316(2), 316(5), 318(4), 61(2)
Subjects
- bail
- extortion
- false statements
- cash smuggling
- ATM
- criminal procedure
- regular bail
- trial expedite
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.76130 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-331 Year-2025 Thana- GANDHIMAIDAN District- Patna
======================================================
Vikash Kumar Son of Naveen Kumar Resident of Village - Panhara, Bela
Taradhi, P.S - Naubatpur, District - Patna.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ashok Kumar Garg, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pandey, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
3 16-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in
connection with Gandhi Maidan P.S. Case No. 331 of 2025
registered for the offence punishable under sections 316(2),
316(5), 318(4), 303(2) and 61(2) of B.N.S.
3. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner
along with one Dheeraj Kumar are the employees of C.M.S.
Info. System Ltd. Co. who are the custodian for filing cash in
the ATMs. The allegation against the petitioner is that he along
with co-accused Dheeraj Kumar was going to load cash at State
Bank of India, Gandhi Maidan Atm. It is further alleged that this
petitioner boarded in Swift Dzire Car with the bag containing
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.76130 of 2025(3) dt.16-01-2026
2/3
Rs. 20 lacs.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He is
having no criminal antecedent and he is languishing in judicial
custody since 02.06.2025. There is no eye witness of this
alleged occurrence. Learned counsel for the petitioner has
submitted that the keys of chest of the van are always with two
persons. In the said van, the petitioner and co-accused Dheeraj
were the persons. It has further been submitted that the cash
from the van was taken away by both the persons and not only
by this petitioner. It has further been submitted that co-accused
Dheeraj Kumar has been granted bail by this Court vide order
dated 14.10.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 70892 of 2025. The
case of this petitioner stands on similar footing.
5. Countering this, learned APP for the State has
submitted that from entire diary, it is clear that there are
materials to show that the petitioner boarded in Swift Dzire car
with a bag containing Rs. 20 lacs, if at all, the story propounded
by learned counsel for the petitioner is taken to be true for a
moment that the keys of the chest was with both of them then
also, petitioner is the person who has moved with the cash on a
Swift Dzire Car.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.76130 of 2025(3) dt.16-01-2026
3/3
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this court is
not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail at this stage. As
such, his prayer for bail stands rejected.
7. However, the petitioner may be at liberty to renew
his prayer for bail after six months if the trial is not concluded.
8. The trial court is directed to expedite the trial and
conclude the same as soon as possible.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
Shubham/-
U T
Checking your session…