Rahul Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Virendra Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Arun Kumar Singh, APP

¶10

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

¶11

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER

¶12

2 18-03-2026

¶13

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned

¶14

APP for the State.

¶15

The petitioners have prayed for regular bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under sections 318(4), 319(2), 336(3), 338, 340(2), 112,3(5) of BNS., 2023 and Section 66(D) of the I.T. Act as well as Section 9(1) of the Promotion and Regulation of Online Gaming Act, 2025.

¶16

The case of the prosecution is that on 28.11.2025, police received an information that in a rented house, Anil Kumar Jaiswal and Aman Kumar Jaiswal have called persons from all over India, and they are indulged in mobile gaming and cyber fraud. On this input, police reached at the rented house and from there, 31 mobile phones, various SIM cards, 4 laptops,

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17486 of 2026(2) dt.18-03-2026 2/3

¶18

two wi-fi router, 82 ATMs, 9 passbooks and 5 chequebooks were recovered. It is also alleged that from there, a total of 18 persons were arrested. The name of these persons finds place in that list.

¶19

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are innocent and have committed no offence. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that from perusal of the seizure list it will transpire that from the possession of these petitioners only mobile (one from each) were recovered and as far as other incriminating articles are concerned, it was recovered from the room not from the conscious possession of these petitioners. Learned counsel for the petitioners has further submitted that they have come there on the call of Anil Kumar and Aman Kumar Jaiswal. It has further been submitted that the center which was raided is a coaching center and the mobile and laptops which are recovered are those of the center. Learned counsel for the petitioners has further submitted that similarly situated co-accused persons having granted bail by this court while Cr. Misc. No. 9415 of 2026. The case of these petitioners stands on similar footing. A statement has been made in para-3 of this petition that the petitioners have got no criminal antecedent. Moreover, they are

¶20

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17486 of 2026(2) dt.18-03-2026 3/3

¶21

languishing in judicial custody since 30.11.2025.

¶22

Learned APP appearing for the state has opposed the prayer of regular bail.

¶23

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this court is inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail. The above named petitioners are directed to be released on bail in connection with Buxar Cyber P.S. Case No. 55 of 2025 on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate- V, Buxar/ Concerned Court.

¶24

(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)

¶25

durgesh/-

¶26

U T

Rahul Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rahul Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bittu Prajapatti Vs The State of Bihar

Akhilesh singh Vs The State of Bihar

Ram Babu Shandilya Vs Union of India through The Deputy Director, Directorate of Enforcement, Patna Zonal Office

Jagarnath Thakur @ Chunnu Vs The State of Bihar

Dashrat Bagh Vs The State of Bihar

Chandan Kumar @ Chandan Rai Vs The State of Bihar