--1-- Neutral Citation No. ( 2026:JHHC:14452 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI A.B.A. No. 595 of 2026 ---- Karu Miya @ Karu Mian, aged about 38 years, S/o Anamul Miya @ Anaul Mian, resident of village- Deghari, P.O. & P.S.- Narayanpur, District- Jamtara .... Petitioner -- Versus -- The State of Jharkhand .... Opposite Party ---- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI --- For the Petitioner :- Mr. Kaushik Sarkhel, Advocate For the State :- Mr. Shailendra Kr. Tiwari, Spl.P.P. ---- 06/12.05.2026 Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as the learned counsel appearing for the State. 2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Jamtara Cyber Crime P.S. Case No.50 of 2025, corresponding to Cyber Case No.100 of 2025 for the alleged offences registered under Sections 111(2)(b), 317(2), 317(5),318(4), 319(2), 336(3), 338, 340(2), 3(5) of the B.N.S., Section 66(B) (C) (D) of the I.T. Act, and Section 42(3)(e) of the Communication Act, pending in the Court of learned Special Judge Cyber Crime, Jamtara. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and the petitioner has nothing to do with the allegation of cyber crime. He next submits that even the seized mobile phones and account number of Bandhan Bank, cheque books are not belonging to the petitioner, only on the confessional statement, the name of the --2-- petitioner has come. On these grounds, he submits that anticipatory bail may kindly be granted. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the State opposes the prayer and submits that the apprehended co-accused has taken the name of the petitioner and he has stated that the mobile number, which has been used in the crime of the petitioner. He also submits that petitioner does not cooperate in the investigation. 5. Considering that the allegations are there against the petitioner, the mobile phone and other documents were recovered alleged to be of the petitioner as it has been pointed out by apprehended co- accused and the case is arising out of a cyber crime. 6. In the attending facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to grant privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, hence, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected. (Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Dated 12.05.2026 Jay/