Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 10503 (JHR)

FAIZAN ANSARI ALIAS FEZAN ALIAS FAIJAN ANSARI v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

B.A./799/2026 · 2026-02-26

Anil Kumar Choudhary

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2026:JHHC:5825] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 799 of 2026 Faizan Ansari @ Fezan @ Faijan Ansari, son of Taslim Miya, aged about 25 years, resident of village Kapsa, Post Office Gopibandh and Police Station- Sarwan, Sub Division - Madhupur, District Deoghar, Jharkhand … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opp. party Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY For the Petitioner : Mr. Sumit Prakash, Adv. For the State : Mr. Shailendra Kr. Tiwari, Spl.PP 02 / 26.02.2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Deoghar Cyber P. S. case no. 163 of 2025 instituted under Section 319(2), 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Section 66 B, 66 C, 66 D and 84 C of the I.T. Act. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner was involved in commission of cybercrime and online fraud by posing a fake Phone-pe officer and from the possession of the petitioner one mobile phone has been recovered. It is submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent, as mentioned in paragraph 14 of the bail application. It is next submitted that the petitioner has been in jail custody since 05.12.2025, as mentioned in para 1 of this bail application. It is next submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is ready and willing to co-operate with the trial of the case and undertakes not to annoy or disturb the informant or the other witness of the case in any manner during trial of the case, hence, the petitioner may be admitted to regular bail. Learned Spl. P.P. opposed the prayer for regular bail. Considering submissions of learned counsels and the facts as stated above, I am inclined to release the petitioner on bail. Hence, the court below is directed to release the petitioner on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge II cum Cyber Crime Special Court, Deoghar in connection with Deoghar Cyber P. S. case no. 163 of 2025 with the condition that the petitioner will not annoy or disturb the informant or the other witness of the case in any manner during trial of the case and will co-operate with the trial of the case and will furnish mobile phone number and photocopy of the Aadhar Card in the court below with an undertaking that he will not change the mobile phone number during the trial of the case. (ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.) Dated 26.02.2026 Smita/-