Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 1057 (JHR)

ANKIT KUMAR @ DAMAN KUMAR J D v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

B.A./277/2026 · 2026-02-20

Deepak Roshan

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2026:JHHC:5255 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 277 of 2026 Ankit Kumar J.D @ Daman Kumar J.D., aged about 20 years, S/o Ramesh J.D., R/o Village-Gandhi Nagar, Near Durga Mandap, Baidkaro West, Ganrke, P.O. Sundary Bazar, P.S. Bermo, District-Bokaro ....Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand ....Opposite party --- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN --- For the Petitioner : Mr. Pranav Prakash Mishra, Advocate For the State : Mr. Sahilesh Kr. Sinha, A.P.P --- 02/20.02.2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P for the State. 2. The Petitioner has approached this Court for grant of regular bail in connection with Special POCSO Case No. 171/2025 arising out of Cyber Crime P.S. Case No. 114/2025, registered for the offence under Sections 95/96/98 of B.N.S, 13/14/15 of POCSO and Section 66E/67B of Information Technology Act, pending in the Court of A.J.C. IV-cum-Spl. Judge POCSO Act, Ranchi. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case merely on account of his UPI ID being misused for the alleged activity, without any involvement or knowledge on his part. He further submits that the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent and he is in custody since 19.09.2025; as such, the petitioner may be enlarged on bail. 4. Learned A.P.P opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that there are specific allegations against the petitioner. 5. Having regard to the gravity of the offence and the allegations made against this petitioner, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail, at this stage. Accordingly, his prayer for bail is rejected. (Deepak Roshan, J.) 20th February, 2026 jk Uploaded on 24/02/2026