In Rijaullah @Md. Rijaullah @Aahan @Bablu vs. The State of Bihar (2025), Supreme Court's Division Bench of Justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and K. Vinod Chandran passed a 2-page long order dated August 21, 2025, wherein, it reversed the order of Justice Sandeep Kumar of the Patna High Court. The High Court had dismissed the petitioner’s application for regular bail was got dismissed.
The Supreme Court's order reads: "Having considered the matter in detail and considering the fact that other co-accused have already been released on bail by the High Court and the present petitioner is in jail since 26.04.2024 that is about 01 year and four months, we are inclined to release the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner be released on bail subject to such terms and conditions as may be imposed by the Trial Court."
In Rijaullah @Md. Rijaullah @Aahan @Bablu vs. The State of Bihar (2024), Justice Kumar had passed a 2-page long order dated August 7, 2024. The petitioner had sought regular bail in the case registered for the offence under Sections 379, 420 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 66(C)/66(E) of the Information Technology Act, 2000. As per the prosecution case, some unknown person called on the mobile of the informant numbered as 7765946015 from different four mobile numbers and in the name of offering Sofa, Lahanga, articles of make-up, I-phone, etc. cheated Rs. 4,40,000/- which is said to have sent by the informant through Pay Phone, Google Pay, Paytm in different accounts.
The petitioner's counsel had submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in thisa case. The name of the petitioner has come in the confessional statement of co-accused Amandeep Raj. The petitioner has clean antecedent and he was in jail since April 26, 2024. APP for the State had opposed the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner and submitted that the Bank card, ATM Card of different bank Rupay card of Axis Bank, Debit Card of HDFC Bank mobiles with SIM was recovered from the possession of the petitioner.
Justice Kumar had concluded: "Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the application for regular bail is dismissed." Supreme has reversed his order.
