Allowed

Samaun Ansari Alias Samaul Ansari v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC20 Sept 2024B.A./3286/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Jharkhand granted bail to the petitioner, an accused in a cyber fraud case. The court relied on similar treatment of co-accused and noted the petitioner lacked criminal history and charge-sheet submission, directing a bond of Rs. 25,000 with sureties.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner enlarged on bail on furnishing bond of Rs. 25,000 with two sureties of like amount, conditioned to cooperate in trial and appear when required.

Samaun Ansari Alias Samaul Ansari Vs the State of… — Cheating and Forgery | Jharkhand HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 3286 of 2024

¶2

Samaun Ansari @ Samaul Ansari, aged about 30 years, son of Falatun Miyan, resident of Village Samlapur, P.O. Patharda, P.S. Sarath (Patharda O.P.), District Deoghar, Jharkhand ... … Petitioner

¶3

Versus

¶4

The State of Jharkhand … … Opposite Party ------- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVNEET KUMAR

¶5

-----For the Petitioner : Mr. Arvind Kumar Choudhary, Advocate For the State : Mr. Sunil Kumar Dubey, A.P.P. --------

¶6

Order No. 04/ Dated 20^th September, 2024

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State.

¶8

The petitioner is an accused in connection with Deoghar (Cyber) P.S. Case No. 09 of 2024, registered under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 66(B), 66(C), 66(D) and 84 (C) of the Information & Technology Act, pending in the Court of Learned Additional Sessions Judge-II-cum-Special Judge, Cyber Crime, Deoghar.

¶9

It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that as per the allegation, petitioner was found involved in the commission of the cybercrime with respect to the innocent person. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that no person has been cheated or forged by any act of this petitioner only it has come that he made a call to some persons but after coming to know that it was a fraud call and the same was disconnected which is mentioned in para 61 of the case diary. Further, it has been pointed out that similarly situated co-accused persons, namely, Ranjeet Das and Uttam Kumar have been enlarged on bail by this Bench vide B.A. No.3610 of 2024 & 3621 of 2024 respectively and Bhim Das has been enlarged on bail vide B.A. No.3622 of 2024 dated 02.08.2024 by the coordinate bench of this Court. It is submitted that this petitioner has no criminal history and he is in jail since 10.02.2024 and charge-sheet in this case has been submitted and therefore possibility of tampering the evidence

¶10

is very remote and in this view of the matter, the petitioner deserves to be enlarged on bail.

¶11

On the other hand, the learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State has opposed the contentions raised on behalf of the petitioner and submitted that from para 61 of the case diary, this petitioner has also attempted to defraud the victim but somehow victim came to know that it was a fraud call and therefore the victim disconnected the call but did not controvert this fact that similarly situated co-accused persons namely, Ranjeet Das, Uttam Kumar and Bhim Das have been enlarged on bail.

¶12

Having heard the parties, perused the records of this case.

¶13

In light of the forceful submission advanced on behalf of the petitioner and under the facts and circumstances of this case, this petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/(Rupees Twenty-five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Court of Learned Additional Sessions Judge-II-cumSpecial Judge, Cyber Crime, Deoghar, in connection with Deoghar (Cyber) P.S. Case No. 09 of 2024, subject to the condition that the petitioner will cooperate in the criminal proceeding pending in the learned Trial Court and he will remain present on each and every date of the criminal trial as and when required, failing which, appropriate order shall be passed by the learned Court below for the cancellation of the bail as per the provision of law.

¶14

(Navneet Kumar, J.)

¶15

Basant/S. Das

¶16

2 B.A. No.3286 of 2024

Samaun Ansari Alias Samaul Ansari v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Samaun Ansari Alias Samaul 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

Shobhit Sharma Alias Raja Alias Abhishek Ji Vs the State of Jharkhand

Raushan Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Surendra Oraon Vs the State of Jharkhand

Rahul Chandrabanshi Alias Rahul Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Md. Afroz Ansari Alias Afroz Ansari Vs the State of Jharkhand

Janishar Akhtar Alias MD Nishar Alias Timil Vs the State of Jharkhand