( 2026:JHHC:20902 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 5255 of 2026 Prince Kumar Das @ Prince Kumar Mandal son of Niranjan Mandal … … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Opp. Party --- CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY --- For the Petitioner : Mr. Ankit Kumar, Advocate For the Opp. Party : Mr. Shailendra Kumar Tiwari, Spl. PP. --- 06/15.07.2026 Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody in connection with Cyber P.S. Case No. 34 of 2026, for the offences registered under Sections 319(2), 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 61(2) of the B.N.S. 2023 and section 66B, 66C and 66(D) and 84(C) of I.T. Act, pending in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-II-cum-Cyber Crime Special Court, at Deoghar. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that one mobile and one SIM Card alleged to have been recovered from the possession of the petitioner and 07 crime links of unknown victims have been identified. The petitioner is in custody since 03.03.2026 and charge sheet has already been submitted. He has submitted that he has specifically stated in the bail application that he has no criminal antecedent. 4. Learned counsel for the opposite party-State has opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that the petitioner has one criminal antecedent being Jamtara Cyber P.S. Case No. 45 of 2022 registered on 23.08.2022 and has produced the report of the Investigating Officer of the case which is dated 13.07.2026 which is taken on record. 5. To this, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that a number of co-accused has been enlarged on bail by this court namely Niraj Kumar Das @ Niroj Kumar Das in B.A. No. 3757 of 2026, Diwakar @ Niwakar Mahara in B.A. No. 4087 of 2026, Rohit Kumar Yadav in B.A. No. 3906 of 2026, Rahul Kumar Das in B.A. No. 3618 of 2026, Sanjay Kumar Das in B.A. No. 3598 of 2026, Chandan ( 2026:JHHC:20902 ) 2 Kumar in B.A. No. 3773 of 2026 and Kundan Kumar in B.A. No. 3771 of 2026. 6. From the perusal of the bail orders granted to the co-accused it is apparent that they had no criminal antecedent and therefore the case of the petitioner stands on different footing. 7. Considering the fact that there are altogether 07 crime links against the petitioner out of which six is of the state of Telangana and one is of the State of Maharashtra and the petitioner has a criminal antecedent as per the report submitted by the learned counsel for the State, this court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, prayer for bail of the petitioner above named is rejected. 8. However, the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail after one year from today. 9. In the meantime, State shall take all endeavour to produce the witnesses before the court as and when directed by the concerned court. 10. Let this order be communicated to the concerned court through FAX/e-mail. (Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) Dated: 15.07.2026 Uploaded on : 15.07.2026 Binit/