Niranjan Kumar … v. The State of Jharkhand
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI (Criminal Miscellaneous Jurisdiction) B.A .No. 2856 of 2024 Niranjan Kumar … … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Opposite Party with B.A .No. 3011 of 2024 Laxman Das @ Lakshman Das … … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Opposite Party with B.A .No. 3053 of 2024 Paltan Das … … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Opposite Party with B.A .No. 3269 of 2024 Pravin Kumar Yadav @ Pravin Kumar … … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Opposite Party
Legal Reasoning
------ CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RATNAKER BHENGRA ------- For the Petitioners For the State : Mr. Niranjan Kumar, Advocate [ in B.A .No. 2856 of 2024] : Mr. Lalit Yadav, Advocate [ in B.A .No. 3011 of 2024 & in B.A .No. 3053 of 2024] : Mr. Anurag Kashyap, Advocate [ in B.A .No. 3269 of 2024] : Mr. Naveen Kumar Ganjhu, APP [ in B.A .No. 2856 of 2024] Mr. Vishwanath Roy, APP [ in B.A .No. 3011 of 2024] : Mr. P.D. Agrawal, Spl. P.P. [in B.A .No. 3053 of 2024] : Mr. Gautam Rakesh, APP [ in B.A .No. 3269 of 2024] -------- 05 /03.07.2024 All the four bail applications arise out of the same police station
Decision
case number, therefore, they are heard together and being disposed of by this common order. The petitioners are accused in connection with Deoghar ( Cyber) P.S. Case No. 05 of 2024 registered under sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code and under sections 66 ( B), 66 ( C), 66 (D)/84 ( C ) of I.T. Act pending in the court of learned Additional -2- Sessions Judge-II- cum- Special Judge, Cyber Crime Cases, Deoghar. Heard the learned counsels for the parties. The learned counsel for the petitioner Niranjan Kumar in BA No. 2856 of 2024 has submitted that from the possession of petitioner two mobile set along with two sims were recovered. It is further submitted that the petitioner has no other criminal antecedent against him. It is further submitted that no case is made out in the alleged sections because there is no evidence in respect of transaction made through cyber crime by the petitioner for cheating to any person. It is further submitted that there is no evidence collected against the petitioner regarding committing of any forgery of valuable sureties or use the same anywhere, so no case is made out for offence under sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 of the Indian Penal Code against the petitioner and he never cheated any person in anyway. It is further submitted that the alleged offence under sections of the Information Technology Act are bailable in nature, therefore, the petitioner may be allowed the privilege of bail. The learned counsel for the State has opposed the bail application of petitioner Niranjan Kumar and submitted that on technical verification suspicious transactions have been indicated and there is indication of suspicious operation and there is indication of evidence of mobile phishing. It is further submitted that the mobile and sims that have been recovered are in the name of other persons and further suspicious transaction have been found related to the recovered mobile and sim. In the NCRP Portal there is complaint of cyber crime pertaining to the seized sim and mobile. There is one victim who has made statement of being cheated of Rs. 50,000/- by the related sim card and mobile, therefore, the bail should not be allowed to the petitioner. The learned counsel for the petitioner Laxman Das @ Lakshman Das in BA No. 3011 of 2024 has submitted that from the possession of petitioner one mobile phone with two sim and two debit cards have been recovered. However, he has stated that petitioner has no other criminal antecedent. The learned counsel for the State has opposed the bail application of Laxman Das @ Lakshman Das and submitted that on technical verification suspicious transactions have been found and there is -3- indication of suspicious operation in the seized mobile and there is evidence of mobile phishing and the mobile and sims seized were in the name of other persons and several suspicious transactions have been indicated. In the NCRP Portal there is complaint made by victim. The learned counsel for the petitioner Paltan Das in BA No. 3053 of 2024 has submitted that from the possession of this petitioner one mobile with sim and two debit cards has been recovered. It is further submitted that petitioner has no other criminal antecedent. It is further submitted that petitioner has not committed any cyber offence and merely on suspicion he has been implicated in the instant case. The learned counsel for the State has opposed the bail application of Paltan Das and submitted that one mobile with sim and two debit cards have been recovered from the possession of petitioner and there is indication of suspicious transaction from the mobile and sims seized, therefore, the petitioner should not be allowed the privilege of bail. The learned counsel for the petitioner Pravin Kumar Yadav @ Pravin Kumar in BA No. 3269 of 2024 has submitted that two mobiles with sims were recovered from the possession of petitioner. It is further submitted that petitioner has no other criminal antecedent. It is further submitted that no any person/victim has lodged any FIR or complaint against the petitioner to show that they have been cheated by the hands of the petitioner, hence no case under section 419 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code is made out against the petitioner. It is further submitted that no evidence has been collected during course of investigation to show that the petitioner has committed forgery or created any forged document to commit offence under sections 467, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code and the offences under the I.T. Act are bailable in nature, therefore, the petitioner may be allowed the privilege of bail. The learned counsel for the State has opposed the bail application of Pravin Kumar Yadav @ Pravin Kumar and submitted that petitioner has confessed his guilt and possession of two mobile phones with sims which corroborates his confession, therefore, he may not be allowed the privilege of bail. The learned counsel for the petitioners of all the bail applications have submitted that the all the petitioners are in custody from 30.01.2024. -4- 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- Special Judge Cyber Crime, Deoghar in connection with Deoghar ( Cyber) P.S. Case No. 05 of 2024, 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.)