2025:JHHC:12111-DB IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 187 of 2025 ------ Yamuna Kumar Rana @ Bhola Rana, aged about 28 years, S/o. Shri Baleshwar Rana, R/o. Vill. Berogai, P.O.- Makathsur, P.S.- Jainagar, Dist.- Koderma, Jharkhand. … … Appellant -Versus - The State of Jharkhand ... … Respondent ------ CORAM: - Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rongon Mukhopadhyay Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ambuj Nath ------ For the Appellant : Mr. Arvind Kr. Choudhary, Advocate For the State : Mr. Shailendra Kumar Tiwari, Spl.P.P. ------ 06/23.04.2025 Heard Mr. Arvind Kr. Choudhary, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. Shailendra Kumar Tiwari, learned Special P.P. 2. This appeal is directed against the order dated 21.01.2025 passed in Miscellaneous Criminal Appeal No. 78/2025 by the Court of learned A.J.C.-II-cum-Special Judge, Cyber Crime, Ranchi in connection with Cyber Crime P.S. Case No. 189/2024, by virtue of which the prayer for bail of the appellant has been rejected. 3. It has been alleged that a letter was received from the National Investigation Agency, Ranchi mentioning therein the names of several persons who are working as agents for human trafficking and sending victims for cyber slavery in South East Asian countries in the name of employment. After contacting the victims, the N.I.A. collected information about the agents, active across the country and got the victims, freed. 4. Submission has been advanced by Mr. Arvind Kr. Choudhary, learned counsel for the appellant that the statement of the victim has been recorded at paragraph no. 62 of the case diary, which reveals that the victim was not treated with cruelty and in fact the victim is working in Dubai. It has further been submitted that the appellant is in custody since 08.08.2024. 5. Learned Special P.P. has opposed the prayer for bail of the appellant while submitting that at the time of arrest of the appellant, a diary containing passport numbers of several persons, details of money 2 | P a g e and persons sent to other countries were found and seized from the possession of the appellant. 6. It appears that the appellant was not a recruiting agent but had illegally sent several persons to different countries for being involved in cyber slavery and in view of the various incriminating articles found from the possession of the appellant, we are not inclined to admit the appellant on bail. 7. This appeal, accordingly, stands dismissed. (Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J) (Ambuj Nath, J) Jay-Rahul/