Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Pat) 4596
PATNA HIGH COURT
S. B. Pd. Singh, J
Rahul Kumar Gupta – Appellant
Versus
The State of Bihar – Respondent
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.79606 of 2025
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Akhauri Kamal Kishore Sahay
For the Respondents: Mr. Akshay Lal Pandit, APP
Insufficient evidence linking the appellant to charged offences justified granting bail.
Headnote:This judgment relates to a bail application in connection with offences punishable under Sections 316(2) and 318(4) of the BNS and Sections 66C and 66D of the IT Act. The facts reveal a case of alleged fraudulent dealings involving unauthorized withdrawals from a bank account. The court found insufficient evidence linking the petitioner to the offences charged and granted bail considering the lack of specific allegations against him and his clean antecedent. The principal issue was whether the evidence sufficed for bail, leading to the determination of no direct involvement of the petitioner in illegal activities.
Result: The petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on certain conditions.
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. B. PD. SINGH ORAL ORDER
2 03-12-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner has filed the instant application for grant of regular bail in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 316(2) and 318(4) of the BNS and Sections 66C and 66D of the IT Act .
3. As per FIR, on 16.07.2024 the informant, Amrendra Kumar, received calls from mobile numbers 9832858618 and 9905900587 regarding a courier delivery. The caller sent a WhatsApp link and asked him to install an app and pay ₹2 as delivery charges. Although the payment attempt failed, on the next day, i.e., 17.07.2024, two unauthorized withdrawals of ₹98,989/- and ₹1,010/- were made from the informant’s bank account. Thereafter, the informant filed a complaint with the Cyber Crime unit detailing the fraudulent transaction.
4. It is submitted by learned senior counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the petitioner is not named in the FIR and no specific allegation has been levelled against him. The mobile numbers mentioned in the FIR do not belong to the petitioner, and he has no connection with those numbers or the UPI IDs in question. The petitioner has not transferred any amount. No incriminating material has been recovered from his possession. However, after completion of investigation, the police have submitted charge-sheet against the petitioner. Moreover, the petitioner has got clean antecedent and he is languishing in judicial custody since 13.09.2025. 5. Learned APP appearing for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail, after framing of charge, in connection with Bhojpur Cyber P.S. Case No. 49 of 2024 on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned C.J.M., Bhojpur at Ara, with following condition:-
(a) Bailors should be family members or close relatives of the petitioner.
(S. B. Pd. Singh, J)
