( 2025:JHHC:32757 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B. A. No. 6420 of 2025 Gyanendra Kumar Das, aged about 23 years, son of Vijay Mahra, resident of village Pathra, P.O. & P.S. Pathrol, District Deoghar. …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand …. Opp. Party ------ CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AMBUJ NATH ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Rahul Ranjan, Advocate For the Opp. Party : Ms. Anuradha Sahay, A.P.P. ----- 4/ 31.10.2025 Heard the parties. 2. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Deoghar (Cyber) P.S. Case No. 82 of 2025, for the offence registered under Sections 111(2)(b), 111(3), 111(4), 319(2), 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2) & 61(2) of the B.N.S, 2023 and Sections 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. 3. On 16.05.2025 at about 12:30 noon, Cyber Police Deoghar on the basis of confidential information that cyber criminals have assembled in Sirsa forest, raided the place of occurrence and apprehended the petitioner and co-accused persons. On search, one mobile phone and Sim card were alleged to have recovered from the possession of the petitioner. 4. It appears that during the course of investigation, statement of one victim was recorded who has claimed that the mobile phone, which was so recovered from the possession of the petitioner, was used in cheating him. 5. It was submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the learned Trial Court has granted bail to some of the co-accused persons, against whom, three witnesses had claimed that they had cheated by them. 6. A report was earlier called for from the learned Special Judge, Deoghar. as to under what circumstances, he had granted bail to those accused persons. -1- 7. The learned Trial Court has tendered apology and has stated that bail was granted to those persons, as the learned lawyer had pleaded that they were falsely implicated in this case. 8. It is general practice, that in each and every bail application innocence and false implication is pleaded by learned lawyers. This cannot be sole ground to grant bail to an accused. 9. It further appears that the learned Special Judge, Deoghar, after tendering apology had continued to grant bail in such cases and has granted bail in more than fifty such cases. These bail applications were earlier withdrawn from this Court. This is an act of sheer dare devilry by the Special Court, Deoghar, who has passed orders granting bail without being afraid of its consequences. 10. Considering the aforesaid facts, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, his prayer for bail is rejected, at this stage. 11. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the learned Registrar General of this Court, who shall place the same before the Hon’ble Zonal Judge of Deoghar Judgeship for the needful. (Ambuj Nath, J.) R.Kr. 31.10.2025 -2-