Azhar Ansari v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.5832 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-369 Year-2025 Thana- Cyber P.S. District- Saran ====================================================== Azhar Ansari S/o Alimudin Ansari Resident of - House No. 6, Lakrakhondha, P.S - Sarath, District - Deoghar, State - Jharkhand ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Pranav Kumar Jha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Yogendra Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 24-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State. Perused the case diary.

2.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Saran Cyber P.S. Case No. 369 of 2025 instituted for the offence under Sections 303(2), 318(4) & 319(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 66, 66(c) & 66(d) of the Information and Technology Act.

3.

The prosecution case, in brief, is that the informant, alleged that on 09.07.2025, she received a WhatsApp call from an unknown person who stated that a KYC update was required for her SBI account bearing No. 20421985977. The caller

2/4 obtained an OTP from her on the pretext of completing the KYC process, after which a sum of Rs. 49,995/- was fraudulently withdrawn from the said account.

4.

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is in custody since 14.11.2025. Petitioner bears one criminal antecedent, as per disclosure made in paragraph No. 3 of the bail application.

5.

It has been further submitted by the petitioner's counsel that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that no cogent or incriminating evidence has been found against the petitioner, as neither any WhatsApp call nor any monetary transaction connected with the alleged offence has been traced to him, and his remand was based solely on suspicion. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, without admitting any guilt, the petitioner is willing to undertake to deposit a sum of Rs. 49,000/- (Rupees Forty-Nine Thousand only) by way of Demand Draft within a period of two weeks, if petitioner be enlarged on bail.

6.

Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner. 7.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances

3/4 of the case, the period of custody already undergone by the petitioner, and the undertaking given by the petitioner for payment of the aforesaid amount, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

8.

Let the petitioner be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 15,000/- (Fifteen Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court below/concerned Court in connection with Saran Cyber P.S. Case No. 369 of 2025, subject to the following conditions: (I) One of the bailors shall be own/close member of the family of the petitioner.

(II) The petitioner shall appear on each and every date fixed at the trial. In case of default in such appearance on two consecutive dates, the Trial Court will have liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner.

(III) The petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs. 49,000/- (Rupees Forty-Nine Thousand only) by way of Demand Draft to the informant within a period of two weeks from the date of his release. In the event of default in compliance, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail. It goes without saying that the aforesaid amount to be returned by the petitioner shall remain subject to the final

4/4 outcome of the trial.

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) Raj Kishore/- U T