Patna High Court
Dilip KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- SANDEEP KUMAR
Holding
The court denied regular bail to the petitioner, finding sufficient grounds to continue his custody.
Summary
The petitioner, Dilip Kumar, sought regular bail in a cyber‑crime case registered under Sections 318(4), 61(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 66C of the IT Act. The prosecution alleged that he opened a current bank account, allowed a co‑accused to operate it, and facilitated large numbers of suspicious transactions amounting to several lakhs of rupees. The petitioner contended that he was a legitimate businessman, that no fraud was alleged in the FIR, and that he had cooperated with police without any incriminating material being seized. The State argued that the account was used for cyber‑fraud, that multiple complaints existed against his other accounts, and that the scale of transactions indicated a serious offence. After considering the allegations and the petitioner’s custody since February 2025, the court found sufficient grounds to deny bail, directing the trial court to expedite the trial.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriate consideration for granting bail in a case involving alleged cyber‑fraud under the B.N.S. and IT Act?
- Does the presence of large suspicious transactions and multiple complaints justify denial of bail?
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 318(4), 3(5), 61(2)
- Information Technology Act — s. 66C
Subjects
- bail
- cyber crime
- bank fraud
- IT Act
- B.N.S.
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.82363 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-2 Year-2025 Thana- Cyber P.S. District- Sheikhpura
======================================================
Dilip Kumar son of Kharo Pandit @ Kharo Prasad @ Kharo Yadav Resident
Of Village -Barui P S -Sheikhpura District -Sheikhpura
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rizwanul Haque
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Raj Kishor Singh
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
8 12-05-2026 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 Sheikhpura P.S. Case No. 02 of 2025
registered for the offence under Sections 318(4), 61(2) and 3(5)
of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 66© of the IT
Act.
3. Earlier the bail application of the petitioner was
rejected on 25.06.2025 in Cr. Misc. No. 23450 of 2025, which
reads as follows:-
Heard learned counsel for the
petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in
connection with Sheikhpura Cyber P.S. Case
No. 02 of 2025 dated 06.02.2025 registered for
the offences punishable under Sections 318(4),
61(2) read with Section 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.82363 of 2025(8) dt.12-05-2026
2/5
and Section 66C of the I.T. Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, on
05.02.2025 on receiving an information by the
informant from Branch Manager, Bank of
Maharashtra, Sheikhpura Branch, that an
account bearing A/C No. 60487378208 which is
a current account of M/S. R.K.P. Construction
and which was opened on 15.04.2024 seems to
be suspicious and the account holder of thesaid
account has visited the branch, the informant
went to the said Branch and the Branch
Manager informed him that at the time of
opening different meager transactions were
made in the said account. He further informed
that on 29.01.2025, the account holder has
prayed to increase the limit of Internet Banking
to Rs. 10 Crores and thereafter a monitoring
was done of the said bank account then it was
found that in the entire day, several meager
transactions took place in the said account. The
Manager has given a letter of request to verify
the account and when the account holder was
asked about his name and address, he disclosed
himself as the petitioner and also disclosed that
he has opened the said account for the purpose
of business as per instruction by one Abhishek.
He has further informed him that some amount
will come in the said account and further he has
to transfer the same on the account numbers as
informed to him by the said Abhishek for which
he would receive some commission. The
informant further said that the petitioner did not
produce any document for his Institution.
Further the mobile number of the petitioner was
verified and it was found that he was talking to
Abhishek Kumar regularly. The said petitioner
further informed that the Net Banking and UPI
are operated by Abhishek Kumar as he has
given his Cheque Book, ATM Cardand Mobile
Number 7870476824 which is linked to the
account of Abhishek Kumar. The informant
further stated that he received bank statement by
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.82363 of 2025(8) dt.12-05-2026
3/5
the Manager and found that many transactions
have been made from 09.05.2024 and till
06.02.2025 and altogether 1174 times amount
has been credited in the account which is Rs.
2416455/- and 83 times amount has been
debited from the account which is Rs.
2083255.48/- and till date Rs. 333199.52/- is
still in the account. It has also further come that
the petitioner was operating four other accounts
as well upon which four complaints are there
which are regarding Rs. 400/-, 26000/-, 15000/-
and 50,000/- respectively.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner
has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and
has falsely been implicated in this case. It is
submitted that petitioner is a businessman and
is engaged in the work of construction and has
opened the present account in the said bank
after fulfilling all the norms as required for
opening a current account in the said bank viz.
GST was done and other documentation
required were provided. The bank opened the
account after getting satisfied of all the
documents provided by the petitioner. It is
further submitted that in the F.I.R., no where it
has been mentioned that any fraud was done. It
is further submitted that no body has made
complaintagainst the said account of the
petitioner. It is further submitted that the
petitioner was called by the police in the police
station and he went there and replied all the
questions and quarries as made by the police
but the police arrested him stating only a line
that some of the complaints have been found on
other account of the petitioner. It is further
submitted that if the petitioner is involved in
cyber fraud he would not have gone to the
police station or participated in the inquiry
made by the police. No incriminating article has
been recovered from the possession of the
petitioner. It is further submitted that except
suspicion, there is nothing on record to suggest
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.82363 of 2025(8) dt.12-05-2026
4/5
any forgery has been committed with any
individual by the petitioner in any manner. It is
further submitted that during the course of
investigation, not a single independent witness
has come forward before the police that forgery
has been committed with them by the petitioner.
The petitioner has clean antecedent as stated in
paragraph no. 3 of the bail petition. He is in
custody in this case since 07.02.2025.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has
vehemently opposed the bail petition of the
petitioner and has submitted that the petitioner
is involved in cyber crime and he alongwith
other co-accused persons used to cheat the
innocent people. The account which was being
used in the cyber crime is in the nameof the
petitioner and from the date of opening, the
account i.e., 15.04.2025 till date, several lakh
rupees have been transferred to that account.
He has further submitted that there are many
accounts in the name of the petitioner as per the
J.M.I.S. Portal, complaints have been filed on
all the accounts and investigation is still
pending.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts
and circumstances of the case and finding
substance in the contention of the learned A.P.P.
for the State, this Court is not inclined to grant
bail to the petitioner and the same is rejected in
connection with Sheikhpura Cyber P.S. Case
No. 02 of 2025, pending in the court of learned
C.J.M. Sheikhpura.
7. The application stands rejected.
8. The learned trial court is directed
to expedite the trial of the petitioner and
conclude the same at the earliest.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the trial is going on. The petitioner is in custody since
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.82363 of 2025(8) dt.12-05-2026
5/5
07.02.2025.
5. Considering the fact that the petitioner is involved
in cyber crime and huge transactions have been made in the
bank account of the petitioner, I am not inclined to grant regular
bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, this application for regular
bail stands rejected.
(Sandeep Kumar, J)
Shishir/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.