Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 6522 (JHR)

MD MURTEJIM ANSARI ALIAS MURTEJIM ANSARI v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

B.A./1962/2025 · 2025-08-05

Ambuj Nath

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:JHHC:21937 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 1901 of 2025 ------ Jainul Ansari, aged about 19 years, Son of Allauddin Ansari, Resident of Village-Khaira, P.O.-Geria and P.S.-Bindapathar, District-Jamtara … … Petitioner -Versus - The State of Jharkhand ... … Opposite Party With B.A. No. 1962 of 2025 Md. Murtejim Ansari @ Murtejim Ansari, aged about 33 years, son of Hazrat Ansari, Resident of Village-Khaira, P.O.-Geria and P.S.-Bindapathar, District-Jamtara … … Petitioner -Versus - The State of Jharkhand ... … Opposite Party ------ CORAM: - HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AMBUJ NATH ------ For the Petitioner : M/s. Kaushal Kishor Mishra, Advocate For the State : M/s. Shailendra Kumar Tiwari, Special P.P. ----- 03/05.08.2025 I.A. No. 9233 of 2025 in B.A. No.1901 of 2025 I.A. No. 9237 of 2025 in B.A. No. 1962 of 2025 Learned counsel for the petitioners seeks permission to withdraw these Interlocutory Applications. Prayer is allowed. Accordingly, these Interlocutory Applications are dismissed as withdrawn. B.A. No. 1901 of 2025 B.A. No. 1962 of 2025 Both these Bail Applications arise out of the same police case. Accordingly, they are being disposed of by a common order. 2. Heard the parties 3. The petitioners have been made accused in connection with Jamtara Cyber Crime P.S. Case No. 04 of 2025, for the offences registered under Sections 111(2)(ii), 317(2), 318(4), 319(2), 336(3), 338, 340, 3(5) of the B.N.S. and Section 66(B), (C), (D) of the I.T. Act, pending in the Court of learned Special Judge Cyber Crime, Jamtara. 4. On 13.01.2025, Cyber Police, Jamtara, on the basis of confidential information that cyber criminals had assembled near Amjharia Forest, raided the place of occurrence and apprehended these petitioners alongwith co-accused persons. On search, mobile phones were recovered from their possession. 5. It appears that victims have turned up to claim that these petitioners had cheated them. 6. In view of the aforesaid facts, I am not inclined to release the petitioners, on bail. Accordingly, their prayer for bail stands rejected at this stage. (Ambuj Nath, J.) Nandini/- Uploaded