Abhishek Kumar Jha v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.58994 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-32 Year-2024 Thana- Cyber P.S. District- Madhubani ====================================================== Abhishek Kumar Jha S/o- Bharat Kumar Jha Village- Barha PS- Benipatti Distt- Madhubani ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Kumari Bhawana D/o- Randhir Kumar Village- Near Magrauni Heart Hosp Ps- Nagar Dist- Madhubani ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ritesh Kumar Narain Singh For the State :

Mr. Sanjay Kumar Singh For the Informant Mrs. Sneha Shruti ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 17-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the informant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 316(2), 303(2) of the B.N.S. and Section 66(c) of the I.T. Act.

3. Petitioner is said to have cheated the informant and withdrew Rs. 30,00,000/- from her bank account.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that false and fabricated allegations have been made against him and the fact of the matter is that the petitioner and the informant were having a live-in relationship and the entire conspiracy has been done by the informant in her bid to get married with the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.58994 of 2025(6) dt.17-02-2026 2/3 petitioner. It has also been submitted that even during the investigation, the informant had not provided her bank account to the Investigating Officer through which the money has been transferred. Learned counsel has also drawn the attention of this Court to paragraph 89 of the case diary which is also suggestive of the relationship between the petitioner and the informant and it does not appear to be believable that for the recovery of an amount of Rs. 10,00,000/-, the informant would again allow the petitioner to take another Rs. 10,00,000/- from her. Further, paragraph-147 of the case diary also indicates a transaction of Rs. 5,000/- from the bank account of the informant to the account of the petitioner. Further, the petitioner is in custody since 24.05.2025 and the charge-sheet has been submitted.

5. Learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the informant, however, have opposed the application for bail on the ground that an amount of Rs. 30,00,000/- has been fraudulently taken by the petitioner and the present case also amount to cyber fraud.

6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances and also considering the nature of allegations, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail at this stage. Accordingly, his prayer for bail is rejected in connection

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.58994 of 2025(6) dt.17-02-2026 3/3 Madhubani (Sadar) Cyber P.S. Case No. 32 of 2024.

7. However, the petitioner is at liberty to renew his prayer for bail after framing of charge.

(Soni Shrivastava, J) devendra/- U T