Nandlal Das … v. The State of Jharkhand
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI (Criminal Miscellaneous Jurisdiction) B.A .No. 2068 of 2024 Nandlal Das … … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Opposite Party with B.A. No. 2059 of 2024 Ranjit Das @ Ranjeet Das … … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Opposite Party with B.A. No. 2288 of 2024 Manu Mehra @ Manu Mahara … … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Opposite Party with B.A. No. 2362 of 2024 Kuldip Kumar Das @ Kuldip Das … … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Opposite Party with B.A. No. 2588 of 2024 Rupesh Kumar Das … … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Opposite Party with B.A. No. 2793 of 2024 Chatrabhuj Kumar … … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Opposite Party with B.A. No. 2797 of 2024 Santosh Yadav … … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Opposite Party Rohit Kumar with B.A. No. 2802 of 2024 Versus … … Petitioner The State of Jharkhand … … Opposite Party
Legal Reasoning
------ CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RATNAKER BHENGRA For the Petitioner ------- : Mr. A.K. Choudhary, Advocate [BA No. 2068 of 2024 BA No. 2288 of 2024] : Mr. Rahul Ranjan, Advocate [ BA No. 2059 of 2024] : Mr. Sudhansu Kumar Deo,Advocate [ BA No. 2362 of 2024] : Mr. Shahid Yunus, Advocate For the State -2- [BA No. 2588 of 2024] : Mr. Lalit Yadav, Advocate [ BA No. 2793 of 2024 BA No. 2797 of 2024, BA No. 2802 of 2024] : Mr. Pankaj Kumar, APP [BA No. 2068 of 2024] : Ms. Kumari Rashmi, APP [ BA No. 2059 of 2024, BA No. 2802 of 2024] : Mr. S.K. Tiwari, APP [ BA No. 2288 of 2024, BA No. 2362 of 2024] : Mr. Manoj Kumar Mishra, APP [ BA No. 2588 of 2024 BA No. 2793 of 2024] : Mrs. Vandana Bharti, APP [ BA No. 2797 of 2024] -------- 05 /13.05.2024 All the bail applications arise from the same police station case
Decision
number, therefore, they are heard together and being disposed of by this common order. Heard the learned counsels for the parties. The petitioners are accused in connection with Deoghar Cyber Crime P.S. Case No. 86 of 2023 registered under sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 & 120 ( B) of IPC & section 66( B), 66 ( C ), 66( D), 84 ( C ) of I.T. Act pending in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-II-cum- Spl. Judge, Cyber Crime, Deoghar. The learned counsel for the petitioner in BA No. 2068 of 2024 submits that one mobile and three SIMs were recovered, which belongs to the petitioner and there is no evidence that any crime has been committed by the aforesaid mobile and SIMs. It is further submitted that nothing incriminating has been seized from the conscious possession of the petitioner showing his involvement in cyber crime. It is further submitted that petitioner has no criminal antecedent. The learned counsel for the petitioner in BA No. 2059 of 2024 submits that single SIM card has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner and one of the mobile with SIM cards were planted with a view to make out a case of cyber crime. It is further submitted that petitioner has no criminal antecedent. -3- The learned counsel for the petitioner in BA No. 2288 of 2024 submits that from the possession of the petitioner one Oppo Android Mobile with SIM and three extra SIMs have been recovered. It is further submitted that there is no evidence on record to suggest that the petitioner had cheated any person. It is further submitted that petitioner has got no criminal antecedent. The learned counsel for the petitioner in BA No. 2362 of 2024 submits that from the possession of petitioner one mobile phone and SIMs were recovered. Counsel says that no one has made any complaint against the petitioner regarding any illegal transaction or transfer of money in his account. It is further submitted that petitioner has got no criminal antecedent. The learned counsel for the petitioner in BA No. 2588 of 2024 submits that from the possession of this petitioner it is alleged that Milky white colour vivo android mobile and SIMs were recovered. It is further submitted that there is nothing on record to connect the petitioner with commission of cyber crime by using above alleged recovered articles. It is further submitted that no person has come forward and stated that petitioner has cheated him. It is further submitted that petitioner has got no criminal antecedent. The learned counsel for the petitioner in BA No. 2793 of 2024 submits that from the possession of petitioner one android mobile with SIM was said to have been recovered. It is further submitted that petitioner has no other criminal antecedent. It is further submitted that there is no specific allegation against the present petitioner to whom he has induced/cheated. It is further submitted that petitioner has got no criminal antecedent. The learned counsel for the petitioner in BA No. 2797 of 2024 submits that from the possession of petitioner one android mobile with SIM card, one keypad mobile with SIM were said to have been recovered. There is no specific allegation against the petitioner to whom he has induced/cheated. It is further submitted that petitioner has got no criminal antecedent. The learned counsel for the petitioner in BA No. 2802 of 2024 submits that from the possession of petitioner two android mobile with SIM cards were alleged to have been recovered. There is no specific allegation against the present petitioner to whom he has induced/cheated. It is further -4- stated that petitioner has got no criminal antecedent. Learned counsel for the State in BA No. 2068 of 2024 has opposed the bail petition and submitted that from the SIM pertaining to the petitioner an amount of Rs. 53500/-is alleged to have been cheated. The learned counsel for the State in BA No. 2059 of 2024 has opposed the bail application and submitted that from the possession of the petitioner one mobile was recovered which belongs to another person and not to this petitioner. The learned counsel for the State in BA No. 2288 of 2024 submits that there was one victim with regard to that one attempt was made for cheating by cyber crime. The learned counsel for the State in BA No. 2362 of 2024 has opposed the bail application and submitted that there is one victim from whom money has been cheated. The learned counsel for the State in BA No. 2588 of 2024 has opposed the bail application and submitted that one mobile phone was recovered and there is one victim also in this case. The learned counsel for the State in BA No. 2793 of 2024 has opposed the bail application and submitted that the mobile which was recovered belongs to another person and not to this petitioner and it is also submitted that many money wallets were used in the recovered mobile and corresponding SIM. The learned counsel for the State in BA No. 2797 of 2024 has opposed the bail application and submitted that in the mobiles and SIMs that have been recovered, there is indication that many money wallets were being used as well as many Apps used in the cyber crime were installed. The learned counsel for the State in BA No. 2802 of 2024 has opposed the bail application and submitted that two mobile phones and SIMs are stated to have been recovered from the petitioner and the same belongs to other persons and Apps were also installed which are used in cyber crime. The learned counsels for the petitioners of all the bail applications have submitted that petitioners are in custody from 19.12.2023, therefore, they have spent sufficient time in custody. Having heard both counsels, gone through the records of the -5- 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, Deoghar in connection with Deoghar Cyber Crime P.S. Case No. 86 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 bond 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 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.)