Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Vinod ChaudharyversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL REJECTED

Holding

Anticipatory bail was denied because the nature and gravity of the alleged cyber‑fraud offences warranted custodial interrogation despite the petitioners’ claim of insufficient evidence.

Summary

The petitioners, Subodh Kumar and Vinod Chaudhary, applied for anticipatory bail in connection with a police case alleging involvement in a cyber‑fraud gang that withdrew money from ATMs using counterfeit cards. The prosecution’s case is based primarily on the confession of a co‑accused, Mithun Chaudhary, who alleged that the petitioners received a 5% commission for withdrawing funds on behalf of the gang. The petitioners contended that they were falsely implicated, that no material was recovered from their premises, and that the allegations were vague and based only on suspicion. The State opposed the bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and the Information Technology Act and the need for custodial interrogation. Justice Anil Kumar Sinha held that given the gravity of the alleged cyber‑fraud and the ongoing investigation, anticipatory bail could not be granted. Consequently, the applications for anticipatory bail were dismissed.

Issues considered

  • Whether anticipatory bail should be granted when the allegations involve organized cyber‑fraud and the evidence is primarily a co‑accused’s confession.
  • Whether the lack of material recovered from the petitioners’ premises and the reliance on suspicion preclude the grant of anticipatory bail.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • anticipatory bail
  • cyber fraud
  • ATM fraud
  • organized crime
  • Information Technology Act
  • Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
  • suspicion
  • investigation

Judgment

                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.87099 of 2025
                        Arising Out of PS. Case No.-370 Year-2025 Thana- GRIYAK District- Nalanda
                 ======================================================
                 Subodh Kumar@ Subodh Chaudhary S/O Munsi Chaudhary R/O Vill.-
                 Barchhi Bigha, P.s.- Giriyak, Dist.- Nalanda at Biharsharif

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                                                          with
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 89373 of 2025
                        Arising Out of PS. Case No.-370 Year-2025 Thana- GRIYAK District- Nalanda
                 ======================================================
                 Vinod Chaudhary Son of Mantu Chaudhary @ Mintu Chaudhary R/o Village -
                 Barchhi Bigha, P.S. - Giriyak in the Dist. of Nalanda.

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 (In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 87099 of 2025)
                 For the Petitioner/s     : Mr. Pritish Kumar Lal
                 For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Satyendra Prasad
                 (In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 89373 of 2025)
                 For the Petitioner/s     : Mr. Sunil Kumar
                 For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Navin Kumar Pandey
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA
                                       ORAL ORDER

4   07-05-2026     1.   Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned

                        Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

                   2.   This application, for grant of anticipatory bail, arises out of

                        Giriyak Police Station Case No. 370 of 2025, dated

                        22.08.2025, disclosing offences under Sections 318(4), 338,

                        336(3), 303(2), 340(2), 61 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.87099 of 2025(4) dt.07-05-2026
                                            2/5




               2023 and 66(C) & 66(D) of the Information Technology Act,

               2000.

          3.   The prosecution case, as per First Information report is that

               on 22.08.2025, the police on secret information that a

               suspicious person was withdrawing money from the SBI

               ATM situated at Bahalpur village, proceeded towards the

               place of occurrence and found a person standing inside the

               ATM and on seeing the police party, he tried to flee away,

               but the police apprehended him and he disclosed his name

               as Mithun Chaudhary. Upon search, the police recovered one

               mobile phone, three ATM cards in different names, Rs.

               16,000/- cash and one motorcycle from his possession. It is

               further alleged that the arrested co-accused disclosed that all

               the aforesaid ATM cards were fake and had been provided to

               him by co-accused persons, namely, Rajesh Kumar, Dilkhush

               Raj and Surendra Chaudhary. He further stated that he used

               to withdraw money from different ATMs on their behalf, for

               which he was paid 5% commission on the withdrawn

               amount. Thereafter, the police party proceeded to the house

               of Mithun Chaudhary and, upon conducting a search,

               recovered cash amounting to Rs.81,000/-, along with ATM

               cards, passbooks and other incriminating articles. During
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.87099 of 2025(4) dt.07-05-2026
                                            3/5




               interrogation, he further disclosed that his brother-in-law had

               introduced him to Rajesh Kumar @ Rajesh Chaudhary,

               Dharmendra Chaudhary, Mithun Nonia, Vijay Nonia and

               Ramparvesh Nonia, who were involved in withdrawal of

               money through ATMs. He further stated that his co-villager,

               namely, Subodh Kumar @ Subodh Chaudhary (petitioner in

               Cr. Misc. No. 87099 of 2025), along with Vinod Chaudhary

               (petitioner in Cr. Misc. No. 89373 of 2025), was also

               engaged in withdrawing money from ATMs on receiving 5%

               commission from Rajesh Kumar @ Rajesh Chaudhary.

          4.   Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that the

               petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in

               the present case on the basis of suspicion only. He further

               submits that the petitioners have been made accused in this

               case on the basis of confessional statement of the arrested co-

               accused Mithun Chaudhary who has inimical terms with the

               petitioners and the allegations against them are general and

               omnibus in nature. It is next submitted that nothing has been

               recovered from the premises of the petitioners. Moreover, no

               independent witness or material evidence has emerged

               during investigation to substantiate the allegations, rendering

               the prosecution case based solely on suspicion.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.87099 of 2025(4) dt.07-05-2026
                                            4/5




          5. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the

               prayer for anticipatory bail.

          6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the

               materials available on records.

          7.   The Police apprehended one person with incriminating

               articles which appears to be used in cyber crime. The

               apprehended accused person has disclosed that on the

               direction of the co-accused persons, they operate as an

               organized gang for committing cyber crime. The Police

               recovered Smart Phones, ATM cards, Passbooks and cash

               from the arrested accused person. It appears that all accused

               persons have formed an organized gang to defraud the

               innocent public and the phishing/cyber fraud is rampant in

               the area, where the attackers try to trick individuals into

               providing user names, password and other details and are

               indulged in e-mail phishing, voice phishing, SMS phishing

               etc. Apart from this, such gangs are also actively involved in

               various cyber frauds, including “digital arrest” scams,

               fraudulent loans obtained using Aadhaar cards, ATM

               tampering, unauthorized withdrawals, and similar illicit

               activities. The cyber fraud is committed by a group of

               persons and every person play a different role, such as some
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.87099 of 2025(4) dt.07-05-2026
                                                        5/5




                           of them play tricks in defrauding the account holders, some

                           of the persons are account lender and some, as in the present

                           case, withdraws money through ATMs for the benefits of the

                           entire gang and the kingpin of the cyber crime etc.

                      8.   Considering the nature of allegation and gravity of offence

                           and the fact that the case is still under investigation, for

                           which, custodial interrogation of the petitioner may be

                           required, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the

                           petitioners.

                      9. These applications are, accordingly, dismissed.




                                               (Anil Kumar Sinha, J)
ashwani/-

U      T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.