2026:JHHC:18650 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 5772 of 2026 Vishal Verma, son of Sanjay Kumar Verma. … … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Opposite Party --- CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY --- For the Petitioner : Mr. Aman Kumar Rahul, Advocate For the Opp. Party : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, APP --- 04/25.06.2026 Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 06.06.2024 in connection with Cyber P.S. Case No.148/2024, corresponding to Cyber Crime Case No.18/2024, registered under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, and 120 (B) of IPC and Sections 66 (B), 66 (C ), 66 (D) of I.T. Act, now pending in the court of learned AJC – II – cum – Special Judge Cyber Crime at Ranchi. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the bail application of the petitioner was rejected earlier in B.A. No.11749 of 2025 vide order dated 02.06.2026, on the ground that the matter involves an international syndicate of cybercrime and commission of cyber fraud of Rs.26,90,901.68. He submits that the informant has been examined and he has turned hostile. In cross-examination of the Informant by the accused, the informant has stated that he has received the defrauded amount to the tune of Rs.27 lakhs and that there has been a compromise between the parties. 4. The learned counsel submits that in view of the fact that the informant has turned hostile, the petitioner may be enlarged on bail. 5. Out of 8 witnesses, only 1 witness has been examined so far as back as on 19th November 2025. 6. The learned counsel submits that co-accused namely Yogesh Kumar Agarwal and Vishal Sharma and Ashish Kumar have been enlarged on bail by co-ordinate Bench in B.A. (Filing) No.23978 of 2026:JHHC:18650 2 2025, B.A. No. No.8930 of 2025 and B.A. No. 6020/2025 vide orders dated 17.10.2025, 24.11.2025 and 15.10.2025 respectively. 7. The learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for bail. 8. After hearing the learned counsels for the parties and considering the fact that the bail application of the petitioner was rejected earlier on merit and so far as the examination of the informant is concerned, he has stated that there has been a compromise. The same does not mean that the cyber fraud has not been committed. There is allegation of committing cyber fraud of huge amount by way of organized crime crossing international boundaries against the petitioner. In such circumstances, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, this bail application is rejected. 9. However, there can be no reason not to produce the remaining witnesses. The petitioner is in custody since 06.06.2024. 10. The State is directed to ensure that the remaining witnesses are promptly produced before the court. 11. The learned counsel for the State is directed to communicate this order to the Superintendent of Police of the concerned district and also to Director, Prosecution to ensure compliance and to follow up. 12. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the learned court concerned through “FAX/email”. (Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) Date of Order:25.06.2026 Saurav/- Date of Uploading:25.06.2026