2026:JHHC:17253 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 4081 of 2026 Bipin Kumar Yadav aged about 30 years s/o Bali Yadav R/o Village: Chajora, P.O. Thakur Ganti, P.S. – Thakur Ganti, Dist.- Godda, State- Jharkhand. .... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opp. Party(s). ------ CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Peeyush Krishna Choudhary, Advocate Mr. Manoj Kumar Jha, Advocate Mr. Amrit Anunay, Advocate For the Opposite Party : Mr. Vineet Kumar Vashihstha, Spl.P.P. …...... 04/15.06.2026: This bail application has been filed under Sections 483 & 484 of BNSS, 2023 wherein, prayer has been made for grant of bail as he is in custody for allegedly committing offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 338, 336(3), 336(4), 340(2) of B.N.S. and under Section 66(C), 66(D) of Information Technology Act, 2000. 2. Heard, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the State and have also gone through the impugned order. 3. The prosecution case is based on a written report submitted by Umesh Mandal alleging that beneficiaries of Maiya Samman Yojna and Abua Awas Yojna complained that although government benefits were credited to their bank accounts, the money disappeared from their accounts. The beneficiaries further alleged that their Aadhaar cards and fingerprints were collected during mosquito net distribution, after which unknown persons fraudulently withdrew money from their accounts. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the case. He further submits that he was not named in the FIR and has been implicated only on the basis of the suspicion. He also submits that 2026:JHHC:17253 2 the petitioner has no connection with the alleged transactions involving the beneficiaries' accounts. He further submits that nothing incriminating has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner except his personal mobile phone and its accessories. No material has been brought on record to establish his involvement in the alleged offence. 5. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail. 6. After hearing the parties and after going through the record, especially the impugned order, I find that the petitioner was not named in the FIR. The allegations relate to fraudulent withdrawal of money from the bank accounts of beneficiaries by unknown persons. No substantial material has been placed on record to show the petitioner's direct involvement in the alleged offence. He has been implicated only on the basis of the suspicion. 7. Considering the aforesaid fact, I am inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the petitioner, named above, is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dumka in connection with Dumka (M) P.S. Case No. 27 of 2025, GR Case No. 433 of 2025 subject to the condition that one of the bailors should be a close relative of the petitioner, having sufficient landed property in his/her own name within the State of Jharkhand. 8. Accordingly, this Bail Application is allowed. (ANANDA SEN, J.) 15th June, 2026 Tanuj/- Uploaded on 16.06.2026