Allowed

Rahul Pandit v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC12 Jun 2024B.A./2187/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Regular bail application in a cyber cheating and forgery FIR under IPC and Information Technology Act provisions. The court granted bail on a Rs.25,000 bond with two sureties, subject to conditions including attendance at trial, non-repetition of offences, and no tampering with evidence or witnesses.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail on furnishing bond of Rs.25,000 with two like sureties to the satisfaction of ASJ-II, Deoghar, with conditions.

Rahul Pandit Vs the State of Jharkhand — Cheating and Forgery | Jharkhand HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 2187 of 2024

Rahul Pandit

….. Petitioner

Versus

The State of Jharkhand ….. Opp. Party

¶6

--------CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA -------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Rahul Ranjan, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Shailesh Kumar Sinha, A.P.P. ---------

¶7

Order No. 04/Dated: 12^th June, 2024

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶9

The petitioner has been made an accused in connection with Cyber P.S. Case No. 86 of 2023 registered for the offence under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B of the I.P.C. and Sections 66(B), 66(C), 66(D), 84(C) of the Information Technology Act., pending in the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge- II, Deoghar.

¶10

As per FIR, allegation is that on 18.12.2023, informant received an information that some persons were committing Cyber Crime in different villages within Deoghar District. On the basis of this information, raiding team conducted a raid and apprehended 12 persons and their mobile set along with SIM Cards, etc.

¶11

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence at all as alleged in the FIR. Petitioner undertakes to cooperate in the trial of the case by remaining physically present as and when required and shall not indulge in any manner in tampering with the prosecution evidences or influencing the witnesses of prosecution. Hence, the petitioner may be extended the privilege of bail. Co-accused with similar allegation has already been extended privilege of bail by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 13.05.2024 passed in B.A. No. 2068 of 2024 with other cases, vide order dated 14.05.2024 passed in B.A. No. 2061 of 2024, vide order dated 19.04.2024 passed in B.A. No. 2119 of 2024, vide order dated 16.05.2024 passed in B.A. No. 2060 of 2023. Hence, the petitioner may be extended the privilege of bail.

¶12

P a g e 1 | 2

¶13

On the other hand, learned Addl.P.P appearing for the State has opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner. Hence, petitioner does not deserve bail.

¶14

Regard being had to the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegation coupled with the materials available against the petitioner, I am inclined to release the petitioner on regular bail. Accordingly, the petitioner named above is directed to be released on bail on furnishing of bail bond of Rs.25,000/- ( Rupees Twenty five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge- II, Deoghar in connection with Cyber P.S. Case No. 86 of 2023 subject to the conditions:-

¶15

(1) Petitioner shall remain physically present on each and every date till the conclusion of the trial of this case unless prevented from sufficient cause to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court.

¶16

(2) Petitioner shall not indulge in any or other similar offence till the conclusion of the trial.

¶17

(3) Petitioner shall not indulge in tampering with the prosecution evidences or influencing the prosecution witnesses.

¶18

In case of violation of the aforesaid conditions, the bail of the petitioner shall be cancelled and shall be taken into custody by the learned Trial Court itself.

¶19

(Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.)

¶20

Simran/

¶21

P a g e 2 | 2

Rahul Pandit v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rahul Pandit 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vivekanand Sadhu Vs The State Of Jharkhand And Anr.

Shambhu Kumar Mandal Alias Shambhu Kr Mandal Vs the State of Jharkhand

Mahesh Ram Vs the State of Jharkhand

Bhim Gope Vs the State of Jharkhand

Sonaram Korah Alias Sonaram Koda Alias Mata Vs the State of Jharkhand

Gopi Singh Sardar Vs the State of Jharkhand