Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 6032 (PAT)

Subodh Kumar@ Subodh Chaudhary v. The State of Bihar

CR. MISC./87099/2025 · 2026-05-07

Anil Kumar Sinha

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

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. ashwani/- (Anil Kumar Sinha, J) U T