Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 20174 (JHR)

ALI MOHAMMAD v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

B.A./5713/2026 · 2026-07-15

Anubha Rawat Choudhary

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2026:JHHC:20993 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 5713 of 2026 Ali Mohammad, son of Kashim Mian … … Petitioner Versus State of Jharkhand … … Opposite Party --- CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY --- For the Petitioner : Mr. Kaushik Sarkhel, Advocate For the Opp. Party : Mr. Shailendra Kr. Tiwari, Spl. P.P. --- 06/15.07.2026 Heard the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the parties. 2. A counter-affidavit has been filed during the court proceedings, which is taken on record. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 20.02.2026 in connection with Jamtara cyber crime P.S. Case No. 11 of 2026, registered under Sections 111(1)(iii), 318(4), 319(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, sections 66(B)(C)(D) of Information Technology Act and section 42(3)(e) of the Telecommunication Act, 2023, now pending in the court of learned Special Judge Cyber Crime, Jamtara. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the bail application of the petitioner was rejected earlier vide order dated 14.05.2026 in B.A. No. 3729 of 2026 and since the case was at the stage of investigation, the petitioner was given liberty to renew the prayer for bail after framing of charge. 5. The learned counsel submits that the charge has been framed on 25.05.2026 and the petitioner is in custody since 20.02.2026 having no criminal antecedent. He also submits that it is alleged that two mobile and two SIM cards have been recovered from the possession of the petitioner and one victim has been identified. 6. Learned counsel for the opposite party- State, on the other hand, has opposed the prayer for bail. However, aforesaid submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner are not in dispute. 7. Considering the aforesaid submissions and charge having already framed and considering the fact that the petitioner has no 2026:JHHC:20993 2 criminal antecedent, the petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees twenty-five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Special Judge Cyber Crime, Jamtara in connection with Jamtara cyber crime P.S. Case No. 11 of 2026, 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 even 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 trial court. 8. The instant application is allowed with the aforesaid conditions. 9. Let 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.) Date of Order:15.07.2026 Pankaj Date of Uploading: 15.07.2026