Abdul Gaffar … v. The State of Jharkhand
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI (Criminal Miscellaneous Jurisdiction) B.A .No. 2030 of 2024 Abdul Gaffar … … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Opposite Party with B.A. No. 2033 of 2024 Anwar Hussain … … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Opposite Party with B.A. No. 2084 of 2024 Kamruddin Ansari … … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Opposite Party with B.A. No. 2088 of 2024 Shahabuddin Ansari … … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Opposite Party with B.A. No. 2103 of 2024 Ishteyak Ansari … … Petitioner Versus
Legal Reasoning
The State of Jharkhand ------ CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RATNAKER BHENGRA … … Opposite Party For the Petitioner(s) ------- For the State : Mr. S.K. Deo, Advocate [ B.A .No. 2030 of 2024 B.A. No. 2033 of 2024 BA No. 2103 of 2024] : Mr. Kaushik Sarkhel, Advocate [ BA No. 2084 of 20204 BA No. 2088 of 2024] : Mr. Naveen Kumar Gaunjhu, APP [ B.A .No. 2030 of 2024 B.A. No. 2033 of 2024] Mr. Sunil Kumar Dubey,APP [ BA No. 2084 of 20204] Mr. Subodh Kumar Dubey, APP [ BA No. 2088 of 2024] : Mr. S.K. Tiwari, APP [ BA No. 2103 of 2024] 05 /15.05.2024 -------- All the bail applications, mentioned above, arise out of the same police station case number, therefore they are heard together and being
Decision
disposed of by this common order. Heard the learned counsels for the parties. -2- The petitioners are accused in connection with Deoghar (Cyber) P.S. Case No. 91 of 2023 registered under sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code and sections 66(B)/66( C)/66(D)/84 ( C) of Information Technology Act pending in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-II-cum- Spl. Judge, Cyber Crime Case, Deoghar. The learned counsel for the petitioner in BA No. 2030 of 2024 submits that it is alleged that from the possession of the petitioner one mobile phone with one SIM was recovered. It is further stated that the petitioner has no other criminal antecedent. Learned counsel for the State has opposed the bail application and submitted that crime link has been found on the NCCRP Portal apart from recovery of one mobile and one SIM. It is further stated that there are two victims in this case. The learned counsel for the petitioner in BA No. 2033 of 2024 submits that it is alleged that from the possession of petitioner one mobile and one SIM has been recovered. It is further stated that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent. Learned counsel for the State has opposed the bail application and submitted that one mobile and one SIM has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner. The learned counsel for the petitioner in BA No. 2084 of 2024 submits that it is alleged that from the possession of the petitioner one mobile phone and one SIM has been recovered. It is further submitted that there is no victim and the petitioner has no other criminal antecedent. The learned counsel for the State has opposed the bail application and submits that petitioner was apprehended along with many other co-accused and in such circumstances, it is clear that the petitioner is committing cyber crime. The learned counsel for the petitioner in BA No. 2088 of 2024 submits that only one mobile phone and one SIM was recovered from the possession of this petitioner. Moreover, it is stated that apart from this case the petitioner has one criminal antecedent against him of the year 2022 and in that case he is on bail and that may be considered while considering the bail application of the petitioner. The learned counsel for the State has opposed the bail application and submitted that there are two victim aggrieved from this petitioner and -3- he is in cohorts with other accused persons who are committing cyber offences. The learned counsel for the petitioner in BA No. 2103 of 2024 submits that it is stated that one one mobile and two SIMs were recovered from the possession of the petitioner. It is further submitted that petitioner has no other criminal antecedent. The learned counsel for the State, learned APP has opposed the bail application and submitted that there is no victim and the petitioner is in cohorts with other accused persons who are committing the cyber offences. The learned counsels for the petitioners have further submitted that all the petitioners are in custody from 22.12.2023 and the co-accused, namely, Sajjad Ansari, Rajesh Kumar Das and Gulam Ansari have been granted bail in B.A. No. 2114 of 2024, BA No. 2139 of 2024 and in BA No. 2140 of 2024 respectively vide order dated 19.04.2024 and that may be considered while considering the bail applications of the petitioners. Having heard both counsels, gone through the records of the case and in the facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to release the petitioners of all the bail applications, named above, on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (rupees twenty five thousand only) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-II-cum- Spl. Judge, Cyber Crime Case, Deoghar in connection with Deoghar (Cyber) P.S. Case No. 91 of 2023, subject to the condition that the petitioners shall report to the concerned police station on every last Saturday of the month, between 01:00 and 05:00 p.m for one year, failing which or if any adverse remarks regarding their non-appearance at the police station, their bail bonds shall be liable to be cancelled. Any exemption to such attendance shall be done so after direction of the learned Court below and the petitioners shall remain present on each and every date of trial before the Court below unless dispensed with by the learned Court below with further condition that the petitioners will submit self-attested photocopy of their Aadhaar Cards and also submit their mobile numbers before the learned court below which they will always keep active and will not change it during pendency of this case without prior permission of the court. Sharda/ (Ratnaker Bhengra, J.)