2026:JHHC:17892 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 5395 of 2026 Miraj Ansari @ Meraj Ansari, aged about 21 years, Son of Munawar Ansari @ Manowar Ansari … … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Opposite Party --- CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY --- For the Petitioner : Mr. Arvind Kumar Choudhary, Advocate For the Opp. Party-State : Mr. Manoj Kr. Mishra, Advocate --- 04/19.06.2026 1. Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 1012.2025 in connection with Deoghar (Cyber) P.S. Case No. 166 of 2025, for the alleged offence registered under Sections 111(2)(b), 111(3), 111(4), 319(2), 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2) & 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 read with Section 66(B), 66(C), 66(D) & 84(C) of the Information Technology Act pending in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-II cum Special Judge, Cyber Crime, Deoghar. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the bail application of the petitioner was earlier rejected by this Court in B.A. No. 1282 of 2026 vide order dated 09.04.2026. The charge sheet has already been submitted and considering the custody, the petitioner has renewed the prayer for his bail. He has submitted that the petitioner has one criminal antecedent and in the present case one victim was identified, which is apparent from the order rejected the bail application of the petitioner. He has also submitted that the other co- accused persons namely Manwar Ansari @ Manwar, Sahil Ansari @ Sahil and Alfaj Ansari @ Alfaz Ansari have been enlarged on bail in B.A. No. 1331 of 2026, B.A. No. 1283 of 2026 and in B.A. No. 977 of 2026 vide order dated 10.03.2026, 09.04.2026 and 09.04.2026 respectively. The bail application of the petitioner was rejected 2026:JHHC:17892 2 primarily on account of one criminal antecedent. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner has already been enlarged on bail in the other case registered against the petitioner. 4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite party-State has opposed the prayer for bail. 5. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and considering the custody of the petitioner since 10.12.2025 and also that the other co-accused persons have been enlarged on bail, the petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rs. Twenty five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge- II-cum Special Judge, Cyber Crime, Deoghar in connection with Deoghar (Cyber) P.S. Case No. 166 of 2025 on the following conditions: (i) One of the bailors would be the present pairvikar of the petitioner. (ii) The other bailor should be his close relative. (iii) The petitioner will attend the court on each and every date and on account of his single default, the learned court shall cancel the bail bond furnished by the petitioner. (iv) The petitioner will deposit a self-attested copy of his Aadhar Card along with his mobile number before the learned court which he will not change during the pendency of the case without prior permission of the court. (v) The petitioner shall fully co-operate with the proceedings before the learned court below. 6. The instant bail application is allowed with the aforesaid conditions. 7. Let a copy of this order along with a copy of the affidavit filed with the bail petition be communicated to the court concerned through ‘FAX/E-mail’. (Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) 19.06.2026 Rakesh/- Uploaded on:-19.06.2026