Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 1513 (JHR)

GULAB ANSARI v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

B.A./2288/2026 · 2026-03-23

Pradeep Kumar Srivastava

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2026:JHHC:8047 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.2288 of 2026 Gulab Ansari, aged about 26 years, S/o-Mukhtar Ansari, R/o-Vil- Mattanr, P.O. + P.S.-Karmatar, Dist.-Jamtara … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA For the Petitioner : Mr. Rahul Ranjan, Advocate For the State : Mr. Naveen Kumar Ganjhu, APP Order No.02/Dated- 23.03.2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. 2. The petitioner has been made an accused in connection with Jamtara Cyber Crime P.S. Case No.10 of 2024 registered for offences under Sections 414/419/420/467/468/471/120B of the I.P.C. and under Section 66(B), 66(C) and 66(D) of I.T. Act, which is pending in the Court of Learned Special Judge, Cyber Crime, Jamtara. 3. It has been alleged that on secret information, a raid was conducted and one of the co-accused namely Rais Ansari was caught by the Police who disclosed the name of this petitioner. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that other co-accused persons who were apprehended on the spot, on similar circumstance, have been released on bail by the co-ordinate bench of this Court vide order dated 18.06.2024 passed in B.A. No. 3308 of 2024 with B.A. No. 3013 of 2024 along with B.A. No. 3407 of 2024 and vide order dated 28.06.2024 passed in B.A. No. 3312 of 2024. It is further submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and no material has been collected during the investigation showing his complicity in the alleged offence and the case of the petitioner stands on better footing than other co-accused persons. Petitioner undertakes to 2026:JHHC:8047 2 cooperate in the investigation/trial of the case and abide by all terms and conditions which may be imposed. Hence, the petitioner may be admitted to bail. 5. Learned A.P.P. though has opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner but fairly submitted that the case of the petitioner stands on better footing than other co-accused. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of allegation against the petitioner and also in view of manner of implication of the petitioner, I find substance in the contentions raised on behalf of petitioner. Therefore, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is allowed on furnishing bail bond of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Learned Special Judge, Cyber Crime, Jamtara in connection with Jamtara Cyber Crime P.S. Case No.10 of 2024. 7. Accordingly, this Bail Application is allowed. (Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.) 23.03.2026 Basant Uploaded on 24/03/2026