Patna High Court
Poonam DeviversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- SANDEEP KUMAR
Holding
The court held that regular bail could not be granted as the petitioner was found to be involved in the alleged fraud.
Summary
Poonam Devi applied for regular bail in a criminal case (PS Case No. 226 of 2025) alleging fraud involving the withdrawal of Rs. 14,79,134 from an insurance amount using the informant's UPI and ATM details. The prosecution alleged that she, along with co‑accused, committed the fraud and presented a rejected cheque of Rs. 6 lakh, after which she allegedly assaulted bank officials. The petitioner claimed innocence and sought bail after being in custody since 24‑11‑2025. The State and the State Bank of India opposed the bail. The court, after reviewing the submissions and records, found the petitioner involved in the crime and declined to grant regular bail, emphasizing that its observations were prima facie and not determinative of the trial's merits.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail in a case of alleged fraud under Sections 316(2), 318(4) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023?
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 316(2), 318(4), 3(5)
Subjects
- regular bail
- fraud
- insurance fraud
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- criminal procedure
- UPI fraud
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8832 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-226 Year-2025 Thana- MOHAMMADPUR District- Gopalganj
======================================================
Poonam Devi W/O Shiv Shankar Ram @ Shiv Shankar Kumar Ram R/O
Village Harijan Toli Ward No 4, P.S.- Mohammadpur, District- Gopalganj
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Lokesh Kumar Singh
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Arun Kumar Pandey
For the Bank : Mr. Vinod Bihari Sinha, Advocate
Mr. Ajay Dutt Mishra, Advocate
Mr. Amarjeet Choudhary, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
5 15-04-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned
APP for the State and the learned counsel for the SBI.
2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with
Mohammadpur P.S. Case No. 226 of 2025 registered for the
offence under Sections 316(2) and 318(4)/3(5) of the Bharatiya
Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner, along
with other accused persons, is said to have withdrawn Rs.
14,79,134/- from the insurance amount of the son of the
informant, who died in an accident in Bengaluru, by committing
fraud using the informant’s UPI and ATM.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is innocent and has not committed any offence.
Petitioner is in custody since 24.11.2025.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8832 of 2026(5) dt.15-04-2026
2/2
5. Learned counsel for the State and the learned
counsel for the SBI have vehemently opposed the bail
application.
6. I have considered the submissions of the parties and
have gone through the records of the case. The petitioner has
been found involved in the crime. She had presented a cheque of
6 Lakh for encashment which was rejected by the Bank;
thereafter the petitioner had gone and fought with the bank
officials.
7. Considering the above facts, this Court is not
inclined to grant regular bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, this
application for regular bail stands rejected.
8. It is made clear that any observation made herein 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)
Shishir/-
U T
Checking your session…