Dismissed¶19

Santosh Kumar v. the State of Bihar

Patna HC26 Jul 2024CR. MISC./30424/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Regular bail rejected; cyber crime FIR; Nalanda Cyber P.S. Case no. 2 of 2024; sections 420, 466, 467, 471, 474, 120B, 34 IPC; sections 66, 66C, 66D I.T. Act; raid on statement of co-accused Kundan Chaudhary (Case no. 104 of 2023); recovery of 20 adhar cards, 17 debit cards, 17 passbooks, 6 cheque books, 2 pan cards, 14 sim cards; petitioner in custody since 6.1.2024; charge-sheet submitted; no seizure list claimed; liberty to renew bail after four months in custody or framing of charge; Justice Partha Sarthy; Patna High Court.

What did the court decide?

None; bail refused, with liberty reserved to the petitioner to renew the prayer for bail after four months in custody or on framing of charge, whichever is later. ¶19

Santosh Kumar Vs the State of Bihar — Cheating and Forgery | Patna HC (2024)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

None; bail refused, with liberty reserved to the petitioner to renew the prayer for bail after four months in custody or on framing of charge, whichever is later.

¶19

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner should be enlarged on regular bail in connection with Nalanda Cyber P.S. Case no. 2 of 2024, registered under sections 420, 466, 467, 471, 474, 120B and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sections 66, 66C and 66D of the I.T. Act.

¶13

Court's answer

Taking into consideration the allegations in the F.I.R and the recovery of a large number of articles, as detailed in the F.I.R, from the house of the petitioner in his presence, the Court was not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and rejected the bail application.

¶19

Ratio / Principle

Liberty granted to the petitioner to renew his prayer for bail after four months in custody or on framing of charge, whichever is later.

¶22

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Patna High Court, Criminal Miscellaneous No.30424 of 2024 (oral order dated 26-07-2024, Honourable Mr. Justice Partha Sarthy): Regular bail application of petitioner Santosh Kumar in Nalanda Cyber P.S. Case no. 2 of 2024 (registered under sections 420, 466, 467, 471, 474, 120B and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sections 66, 66C and 66D of the I.T. Act) rejected. Prosecution case: a raid was conducted on the statement of co-accused Kundan Chaudhary recorded in connection with Nalanda Cyber P.S. Case no. 104 of 2023; the petitioner was caught and large numbers of articles, including 20 adhar cards, 17 debit cards, 17 passbooks, 6 cheque books, 2 pan cards and 14 sim cards besides others listed in the F.I.R, were stated to have been recovered from the house of the petitioner in his presence, petitioner and co-accused being alleged to be into commission of cyber crime. Counsel for the petitioner argued false implication resting solely on the co-accused's police-statement in another case, absence of any seizure of incriminating articles or seizure list, no criminal antecedent, custody since 6.1.2024, and submission of charge-sheet; the APP opposed bail. Considering the F.I.R allegations and the recovery of articles from the petitioner's house in his presence, the Court was not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and rejected the application, granting liberty to renew the prayer for bail after four months in custody or on framing of charge, whichever is later.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.30424 of 2024

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-2 Year-2024 Thana- Cyber P.S. District- Nalanda

¶3

======================================================

¶4

Santosh Kumar S/O Late Sunil Yadav R/O Village- Chakpur, P.S- Asthawan, Distt.- Nalanda.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Narendra Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Raj Ballabh Singh, APP ======================================================

¶9

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER

¶10

3 26-07-2024

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

¶12

The petitioner has preferred this application for

¶13

grant of regular bail in connection with Nalanda Cyber P.S. Case no. 2 of 2024 registered under sections 420, 466, 467, 471, 474, 120B and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sections 66, 66C and 66D of the I.T. Act.

¶14

As per the prosecution case, the informant states that on the statement of co-accused Kundan Chaudhary recorded in connection with Nalanda Cyber P.S. Case no. 104 of 2023, a raid was conducted. The petitioner was caught and from the possession of the petitioner large number of articles including 20 adhar cards, 17 debit cards, 17 passbooks, 6 cheque books, 2

¶15

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30424 of 2024(3) dt.26-07-2024 2/3

¶16

pan cards, 14 sim cards besides other articles as mentioned in the F.I.R was recovered. It is stated that the petitioner along with other co-accused are into commission of cyber crime.

¶17

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case only on the basis of the statement of co-accused made before police in another case. With respect to the allegedly seized articles it is submitted that no incriminating article has been seized from the petitioner’s possession and it is for this reason that there is no seizure list available on record. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent and he is in custody since 6.1.2024. Charge-sheet has been submitted in the case.

¶18

The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State.

¶19

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the allegations in the F.I.R, the petitioner having been caught and in presence of the petitioner, large number of articles as given in detail in the F.I.R having been recovered from the house of the petitioner, the Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and the application is rejected.

¶20