( 2026:JHHC:19644 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A. B. A. No. 3517 of 2026 Rupa Bera, aged about 49 years, daughter of Sunil Ghosh, resident of Ghosh Para, Muragachha (CT), P.O.-Jugberia, P.S. Barrackpore, District-North 24 Parganas, West Bengal, PIN 700110 ...... … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .…. … Opposite Party -------- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI For the Petitioner :Mr. Anikit Burman, Advocate For the State : Mr. Shailendra Kumar Tiwari, Spl.P.P. 02/ 06.07.2026: Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. 2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Ranchi Cyber CID P.S. Case No. 160 of 2025, registered under sections 318(2), 318(3), 318(4), 319(2), 336(2), 336 (3), 338, 340(2) and 61(2) of BNS, 2023 and sections 66(B), 66(C) & 66(D) of Information Technology Act, 2000, pending in the Court of learned Additional Judicial Commissioner-II- cum-Special Judge, Cyber Crime Act. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case being one of the director of Hazzten Educate Pvt. Ltd and in view of that allegations are made of taking Rs. 2,07,92,009/-. He submits however, if any amount is transferred in the account of the said company that is not on the instruction of the petitioner as there are other directors of the said company also. On these grounds, he submits that the petitioner may kindly be provided privilege of anticipatory bail. 4. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer and submits that petitioner appears to be one of the director of Hazzten Educate Pvt. Ltd and by way of cyber fraud crime an amount of Rs. 2,07,92,009/-has ( 2026:JHHC:19644 ) been collected and out of the said amount, Rs. 27,00,000/- has been transferred in the account of the said company and petitioner has not explained anything with regard to said transfer of money in the account of the company. 5. Considering that petitioner happens to be director of Hazzten Educate Pvt. Ltd and allegations are there of transferring Rs. 27,00,000/- in the account of the company out of Rs. 2,07,92,009/-. 6. In the attending facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, his prayer for anticipatory bail is hereby rejected. Dt.06.07.2026 ( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) satyarthi-