Allowed

Israt Ansari v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC4 Feb 2021B.A./9/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In the High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi, Justice Anil Kumar Choudhary granted bail to the petitioners in a cyber crime and cheating case by recording their undertaking to regularize impugned stamp paper defects post-lockdown.

What did the court decide?

Direction to release petitioners on bail on furnishing a bond of Rs. 25,000 each with two sureties and undertaking to cooperate with the trial, ignoring stamp paper defects.

Israt Ansari Vs the State of Jharkhand — Bail and Remand | Jharkhand HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 9 of 2021

¶2

Israt Ansari

¶3

Wasim Ansari … Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party

¶4

------

¶5

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

¶6

For the Petitioners : Mr. A.P. Joshi, Advocate For the State : Mr. S.K. Tiwari, Addl. P.P.

¶7

------

¶8

Order No.02 Dated- 04.02.2021

¶9

Heard the parties through video conferencing.

¶10

Learned counsel for the petitioners personally undertakes to remove the defects as pointed out by the stamp reporter within two weeks after the lockdown period is over.

¶11

In view of the personal undertaking of the learned counsel for the petitioners, the defects pointed out by the stamp reporter are ignored for the present.

¶12

The petitioners have moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with Deoghar Cyber P.S. Case No.64 of 2020 registered under sections 419/420/467/468/471/120B/34B of the Indian Penal Code and under sections 66(B)/66(C)/66(D)/84(C) of the I.T. Act.

¶13

The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioners are infamous cyber-criminals and from the possession of the petitioner no.1, one mobile handset with two sim cards and a car and from the possession of the petitioner no.2, one mobile handset with two sim cards were recovered. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioners are all false. It is next submitted that the petitioners have been in custody since 18.10.2020 as has been mentioned in paragraph no. 01 of the bail application. It is lastly submitted that the petitioners undertake to cooperate with the trial of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioners be admitted to bail.

¶14

The learned Addl. P.P. opposes the prayer for bail.

¶15

Considering the submissions of the counsels and the fact as discussed above, I am inclined to enlarge the above named

¶16

petitioners on bail. Accordingly, the petitioners are directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned C.J.M., Deoghar, in connection with Deoghar Cyber P.S. Case No.64 of 2020 with the condition that they will cooperate with the trial of the case.

¶17

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J . )

¶18

Sonu-Gunjan/

Israt Ansari v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Israt Ansari v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pappu Patel Alias Harsh Agarwal Alias Pappu Vs the State of Jharkhand

MD Danish Alias MD Danish Ansari Vs the State of Jharkhand

Goutam Gorai Alias Goutam Gorain Vs the State of Jharkhand

Soyna Singh Sardar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Subhash Prasad Yadav Alias Subhash Yadav Vs the State of Jharkhand

Naimuddin Vs the State of Jharkhand