Akhatar Ansari Vs the State of Jharkhand

Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:JHHC:28707 )

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 2061 of 2025

------

Paltan Kumar Das @ Paltan Das, aged about 29 years, son of Gorang Das, resident of village Kunda, P.O. and P.s. Sarwan, District-Deoghar, Jharkhand … … Petitioner

¶5

… … Petitioner -Versus -

¶6

The State of Jharkhand ... … Opposite Party

¶7

With

¶8

B.A. No. 2077 of 2025

¶9

Akhatar Ansari, aged about 24 years, son of Sohrab Mian, resident of village Manjhladih, P.O. Patharda, P.S. Sarath (Patharda O.P.), District-Deoghar, Jharkhand … … Petitioner

¶10

-Versus -

¶11

The State of Jharkhand

¶12

... … Opposite Party

¶13

With

¶14

B.A. No. 1783 of 2025

¶15

Izhar Ansari @ Izhar Miyan, aged about 22 years, son of Salim Mian, Resident of Village Manjhladih, P.O. Patharda, P.S. Sarath (Patharda O.P.) District, Deoghar, Jharkhand

¶16

… … Petitioner

¶17

-Versus -

¶18

The State of Jharkhand ... … Opposite Party ------

¶19

CORAM: - HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AMBUJ NATH

¶20

¶21

For the Petitioner : M/s. Arvind Kumar Choudhary, Advocate For the State : M/s. Shailendra Kumar Tiwari, Special P.P. -----

¶22

05/18.09.2025

¶23

All these three Bail Applications arise out of the same police case. Accordingly, they are being disposed of by a common order.

¶24

Heard the parties

¶25

Petitioners have been made accused in connection with Deoghar (Cyber) P.S. Case No. 140 of 2024, for the offences registered under Sections 319(2), 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2) & 61 of the B.N.S., 2023 and Sections 66B, 66C, 66D and 84 C of the I.T. Act, pending in the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-II-cum-Special Judge, Deoghar.

¶26

On 27.12.2024, Cyber Police, Deoghar, on the basis of confidential information, raided the place in village Sudiyadih and apprehended these petitioners alongwith co-accused persons. It is alleged that they had assembled to commit cyber - crime. It appears that two mobile phones were recovered from the possession of the petitioner Paltan Kumar Das, one

¶27

mobile phone and debit card are said to have been recovered from the possession of petitioner Akhtar Ansari, while a mobile phone and debit card were recovered from the possession of petitioner Izhar Ansari.

¶28

Report regarding the stage of the trial earlier called for has been received. It appears that the charge has been framed in this case on 16.06.2025. It further appears that not even a single prosecution witness has been examined as yet.

¶29

It was submitted that the petitioners are in custody since 28.12.2024.

¶30

In view of the aforesaid facts, I am inclined to release the petitioners, on bail. Accordingly, the petitioners, named above, are directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-II-cum-Special Judge, Deoghar in connection with Deoghar (Cyber) P.S. Case No. 140 of 2024.

¶31

(Ambuj Nath, J.)

¶32

Nandini/Uploaded

Akhatar Ansari v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Akhatar Ansari v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dablu Kumar Das Vs the State of Jharkhand

Sunny Duusad Vs the State of Jharkhand

Samwel Ekka Alias Takla Vs the State of Jharkhand

Mukesh Kumar Sharma Alias Mukesh Sharma Vs the State of Jharkhand

Izhar Ansari Alias Izhar Miyan Vs the State of Jharkhand

Paltan Kumar Das Alias Paltan Das Vs the State of Jharkhand