2026:JHHC:19519 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 6132 of 2026 Rohit Kumar Mandal, S/O- Pradeep Kumar Mandal … … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Opposite Party --- CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY --- For the Petitioner : Mr. Rahul Ranjan, Advocate For the Opp. Party : Mr. Shiv Shankar Kumar, APP --- 06/03.07.2026 Heard the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the parties. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 26.08.2025 in connection with Jamtara Cyber Crime Case No. 56 of 2025 corresponding to Cyber Case No. 109 of 2025, registered under Sections 111(2)(b), 111(3), 111(4), 111(7), 317(2), 317(4), 317(5), 318(4), 319(2), 336(3), 338, 340(2) and 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, sections 66(b), 66(c) and 66(d) of Information Technology Act and section 42(3)(e) of Telecommunications Act, 2023, now pending in the court of learned Special Judge, Cyber Crime, Jamtara. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the bail application of the petitioner was rejected earlier vide order dated 17th February, 2026 in B.A. No. 11517 of 2025 and in that case, the State was directed to ensure prompt production of witnesses during trial. He submits that thereafter the charge was framed only on 13.03.2026, but no witness has been examined so far. He submits that as per the impugned order dated 16.04.2026, summons have been issued on 01.04.2026. 4. Learned counsel for the opposite party- State, on the other hand, has opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that the earlier order rejecting prayer for bail of the petitioner passed in B.A. No. 11517 of 2025 clearly reveals that there is an allegation that numerous transactions and WhatsApp chats have been mentioned in the case- diary during the period from 26.08.2024 to 26.08.2025 and an amount 2026:JHHC:19519 2 of Rs. 61,40,374/- was deposited through various UPI transactions and during this period, total Rs. 61,30,820/- was also withdrawn. The bank account belongs to the petitioner. 5. After hearing the learned counsels for the parties and considering the allegation against the petitioner pertaining to huge amount involved in cyber offence and the bail application of the petitioner having been rejected on merits earlier, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and hence, this bail application is rejected. 6. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the learned court concerned through “FAX/email”. (Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) Date of Order:03.07.2026 Pankaj Date of Uploading:04.07.2026