2025:JHHC:17730 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No.3507 of 2025 ------ 1. Suraj Kumar @ Suraj Saw, S/o Rameshwar Saw. 2. Pawan Kumar Gupta @ Pawan Saw @ Pawan Kr. Gupta, S/o Birendra Saw. … … Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand. … … Opposite Party ------ CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ------ For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Avilash Kumar, Advocate Mr. Sahil, Advocate For the State : Mr. Shailendra Kumar Tiwari, Spl. P.P. ----- 05/ 03.07.2025 Heard the parties. 2. This anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, has been preferred by the petitioners apprehending their arrest in connection with Telaiya P.S. Case No.82 of 2025, for offences under Sections 316(2), 319(2), 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2) and 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and Sections 66(b), 66(c) and 84(c) of the I.T. Act. The case is presently pending before the Court of learned A.C.J.M., Koderma. 3. Learned counsel representing the petitioners submits that the petitioners have been named in the confessional statement of co-accused who has been apprehended from the spot. He submits that save and except the confessional statement, there is no material as on date in the case diary. He further submits that there is no criminal antecedent of the petitioners also. 4. Learned Spl. P.P. representing the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail and submits that in the place of 2025:JHHC:17730 2 occurrence, several Aadhar Cards and Mobile Sims were recovered and the persons who assembled there, were engaged in cyber crime. He further submits that the petitioners fled from the place of occurrence and thus, it is necessary to investigate the role of the petitioners also by taking in possession the mobile phones and other digital devices of the petitioners, which may need custodial interrogation also, then only the complicity of the petitioners can be brought at light. 5. Considering the submission of the parties, I find that this case needs investigation as there is an allegation that several person including the petitioners had taken a room on rent and they were committing cyber-crime and were alluring persons in the name of escort service. Several materials were already recovered from the place of occurrence i.e. Aadhaar Cards, SIM cards etc., and the persons who have been apprehended, their electronic devices like mobile phones etc., were also taken and are being scrutinized. It is the case that the petitioners fled from the place of occurrence. Since the petitioners have fled from the place of occurrence, as on date nothing has come during the investigation. It is only when the petitioners are made to join the investigation and their mobile devices are seized by the Police some materials may came to light. 6. Considering the aforesaid fact, this is not a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail. 7. Accordingly, this Anticipatory Bail Application stands dismissed. (ANANDA SEN, J.) Prashant. Cp-3