Vijay Prakash Vs the State of Jharkhand

¶1

2026:JHHC:4583

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B. A. No. 10076 of 2025

¶3

….

¶4

Vijay Prakash, Aged about 40 years, Son of Ram Prakash, Resident of Village- 48Shukla Chauraha Pratap Chauraha, Ajnahar Kla, Ajnahar Kla, Jankipuram, PO + PS- Jankipuram, Dist.-Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh ……Petitioner Versus

¶5

The State of Jharkhand ……Opp. Party

¶6

-----

¶7

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD

¶8

----- For the Petitioner : Mr. Avishek Prasad, Advocate For the State : Mr. Shailendra Kr. Tiwari, Spl.P.P For the Informant : Mr. Pranav Prakash Mishra, Advocate

¶9

05/17.02.2026 The present bail application has been filed on behalf of the petitioner for grant of regular bail, who is in custody since 30.06.2025 in connection with Cyber Crime P.S. Case No. 45 of 2025 instituted for the offences under Sections 318(2)/318(3)/ 318(4)/ 319(2) /336(2) /336(3)/338/340(2)/61(2) of BNS and Sections 66B/66C/66D of the I. T. Act, 2000.

¶10

As per written report given by one Riti Anan alleging there that she was in habit of surfing google for trading and for that on 19.02.2025 she was the surfing YouTube for trading and she saw advertisement in the name of Smallcase Stock Investment and when she clicked on that advertisement WhatsApp chat box opened and she received a message from the one co-accused who introduced himself as stock broker and added in VIP Group where 75 persons are the group members where she was given classes for trading and she had invested Rs. 23,95,000/- on their assurance and with the said allegation this present FIR has been instituted.

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP.

¶12

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the

¶13

¶14

2026:JHHC:4583

¶15

petitioner is innocent and has not committed any offence. It is submitted from the Bank Statement of the Informant, it has on record that on 08.04.2025, the amount of Rs. 4,70,023/- has been debited through cheque having cheque no. 328971 and not through online transaction and as such, no case under the IT Act, 2002 is made out against the petitioner. It is submitted that the petitioner is not able to pay Rs. 4,70,000/- (Rupees Four Lakhs Seventy Thousand). It is submitted that the petitioner is in custody since 30.06.2025 i.e. for more than eight (08) months and hence he may be enlarged on bail.

¶16

On the other hand, learned Spl.P.P has opposed the prayer of bail of the petitioner. It is submitted that the petitioner has cheated the Informant to the extent of Rs. 4,70,000/- (Rupees Four Lakhs Seventy Thousand) and he has also cheated various other people and cyber crime has been made to the extent of Rs. 23,95,000/- (Twenty-Three Lakh Ninety-Five Thousand) and hence the prayer of bail of the petitioner may be rejected.

¶17

Learned counsel for the Informant has also opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that the petitioner has cheated the Informant to the extent of Rs. 4,70,000/- (Rupees Four Lakhs Seventy Thousand), which is evident from para-29 of the case diary and as such, the prayer for bail of the petitioner may be rejected.

¶18

Having heard learned counsel for both the sides and from perusal of the records of this case, it appears that there is direct allegation against the petitioner for committing the cyber fraud to the extent of Rs. 23,95,000/- (Twenty-Three Lakh Ninety-Five Thousand).

¶19

It appears that the petitioner is proprietor of Vijay Enterprises bearing Account No. 201029868044 maintained in the

¶20

¶21

2026:JHHC:4583

¶22

Indusind Bank.

¶23

It further reveals from the statement of the said Account No. 201029868044 dated 08.04.2025 of the petitioner maintained by Indusind Bank that Rs. 4,70,000/- has been transferred from the Bank Account of the Informant in the bank account of the petitioner.

¶24

Accordingly, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and hence, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected.

¶25

Thus, B. A. No. 10076 of 2025 is, hereby, dismissed.

¶26

(Sanjay Prasad, J.)

¶27

Dated :- 17.02.2026 Kamlesh/-

¶28

Vijay Prakash v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vijay Prakash v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kamal Mandal Vs the State of Jharkhand

Sumit Kumar Alias Sumit Kumar Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand

Dablu Bhuiyan Vs State of Jharkhand

Ajendra Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand

Vishal Mahli Vs the State of Jharkhand

Jiyan Soren Vs the State of Jharkhand