SANJEET KUMAR vs THE STATE OF BIHAR Advocate - Sri Uday Narayan Sinha — 255/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 318(4),319(2),336(2),336(3),340(2),3(5). Disposed: Contested--REJECTED on 10th March 2026.
REGULAR BAIL.
CNR: BRSP010012182026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
1162/2026
Filing Date
28-02-2026
Registration No
255/2026
Registration Date
28-02-2026
Court
DJ Div. Sheikhpura
Judge
1-Principal District and Sessions Judge
Decision Date
10th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--REJECTED
FIR Details
FIR Number
12
Police Station
CYBER
Year
2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
SANJEET KUMAR
Adv. Sri RamChandra Yadav
VIBHUTI KUMAR
Respondent(s)
THE STATE OF BIHAR Advocate - Sri Uday Narayan Sinha
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Principal District and Sessions Judge
Disposed
HEARING
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 10-03-2026 | Disposed | |
| 02-03-2026 | HEARING |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary The court rejected the bail petition of Sanjeet Kumar and Vibhuti Kumar, who were arrested for cyber fraud involving fake Facebook and Instagram accounts used to defraud people by posing as astrologers offering "Vashikaran" services and old coins. The court found substantial evidence against the accused—including five mobile phones containing fake social media accounts, WhatsApp chats discussing fraud schemes, and the accused's own confessions—establishing their direct involvement in a serious, organized cyber crime threatening public safety; consequently, the court declined to grant bail given the gravity of the offense, ongoing investigation requiring interrogation, and direct allegations. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The court rejected the bail petition of Sanjeet Kumar and Vibhuti Kumar, who were arrested for cyber fraud involving fake Facebook and Instagram accounts used to defraud people by posing as astrologers offering "Vashikaran" services and old coins. The court found substantial evidence against the accused—including five mobile phones containing fake social media accounts, WhatsApp chats discussing fraud schemes, and the accused's own confessions—establishing their direct involvement in a serious, organized cyber crime threatening public safety; consequently, the court declined to grant bail given the gravity of the offense, ongoing investigation requiring interrogation, and direct allegations. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts