Allowed

Suman Kumar Das v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC15 Sept 2026B.A./8013/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Jharkhand granted bail to the petitioner, who was in custody since February 2026 for cyber offences involving telecom fraud, subject to a bond, sureties, and specific conditions including attendance and non-change of mobile number.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted on Rs 25,000 bond with two sureties subject to conditions including court attendance, cooperation, and fixed mobile number.

Suman Kumar Das Vs the State of Jharkhand — Bail and Remand | Jharkhand HC (2026)

¶1

2026:JHHC:27812

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶3

B.A. No. 8013 of 2026

¶4

Suman Kumar Das, aged about 25 years, son of Dilip Das, resident of Village-Charghara, P.O.+P.S.-Sarwan District-Deoghar, (Jharkhand).

¶5

… … Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Jharkhand … … Opposite Party

¶8

¶9

CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY

¶10

¶11

For the Petitioner : Mr. Arvind Kumar Choudhary, Advocate For the State : Mr. Shailesh Kr. Sinha, Advocate

¶12

03 /15.09.2026

¶13

1. Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties.

¶14

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 21.02.2026 in connection with Cyber Crime Case No. 65 of 2026 corresponding to Deoghar (Cyber) P.S. Case No. 28 of 2026, registered for the offence under Section 319(2), 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2) & 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 read with Section 66 (B), 66(C), 66(D) & 84 (C) of the Information Technology Act, pending in the Court of Learned Additional Sessions Judge-II cum Special Judge, Cyber Crime, Deoghar.

¶15

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the bail application of the petitioner was earlier rejected by this Court in B.A. No. 3770 of 2026 vide order dated 15.05.2026, primarily on the ground that 39 complaint were found in the portal and the investigation was still going on and this Court was not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail at that stage. He has submitted that the petitioner is in custody since 21.02.2026 and charge has already been framed. 02 mobile and 02 SIM cards are alleged to have been recovered and 01 SIM is in the name of the petitioner and 02 victims have been identified.

¶16

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite party-State has opposed the prayer for bail. However, the aforesaid submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner are not in dispute. He

¶17

¶18

2026:JHHC:27812

¶19

has also submitted that 39 crime links have been found and 02 victims have been identified.

¶20

5. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and considering the custody of the petitioner and also the fact that charge has already been framed, the petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rs. Twenty five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-II cum Special Judge, Cyber Crime, Deoghar in connection with Cyber Crime Case No. 65 of 2026 corresponding to Deoghar (Cyber) P.S. Case No. 28 of 2026 on the following conditions:

¶21

(i) One of the bailors would be the present pairvikar of the petitioner.

¶22

(ii) The other bailor should be his close relative.

¶23

(iii) The petitioner will attend the court on each and every date and on account of his single default, the learned court shall cancel the bail bond furnished by the petitioner.

¶24

(iv) The petitioner will deposit a self-attested copy of his Aadhar Card along with his mobile number before the learned court which he will not change during the pendency of the case without prior permission of the court.

¶25

(v) The petitioner shall fully co-operate with the proceedings before the learned court below.

¶26

6. The instant bail application is allowed with the aforesaid conditions.

¶27

7. Let a copy of this order along with a copy of the affidavit filed with the bail petition be communicated to the court concerned through ‘FAX/E-mail’.

¶28

(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.)

¶29

15.09.2026 Rakesh/Uploaded on:-16.09.2026

¶30

Suman Kumar Das v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suman Kumar Das 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