Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 20194 (JHR)

BRAHMDEO DAS v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

B.A./5031/2026 · 2026-07-15

Anubha Rawat Choudhary

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2026:JHHC:20940 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 5031 of 2026 Brahmdeo Das, son of Mahangu Das … … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Opposite Party --- CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY --- For the Petitioner : Mr. Lalit Yadav, Advocate For the Opp. Party : Ms. Kumari Rashmi, APP --- 05/15.07.2026 Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 08.04.2026 in connection with Deoghar (Cyber) P.S. Case No.50/2026, registered under Sections 111(2) (b)/111(3)/111 (4)/319(2)/ 318 (4)/ 338/336(3)/340 (2)/ 61 (2) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and under Section 66 (B)/66 (C )/66 (D)/84 (C ) of the I.T. Act, now pending in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge II cum Cyber Crime Special Court, Deoghar. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 08.04.2026 and that the charge sheet has been submitted on 04.07.2026. He further submits that one mobile and one sim were allegedly recovered from the possession of the petitioner, which was standing in the name of the petitioner. It is also submitted that one victim has been identified and there is one crime link. He further submits that the petitioner has one criminal antecedent of a similar nature, in which he has already been enlarged on bail. 4. The learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for bail. However, she does not dispute the aforesaid submissions. 5. After hearing the learned counsels for the parties and 2026:JHHC:20940 2 considering the fact that the victim has been identified and the petitioner has one criminal antecedent of similar nature, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail at this stage. Accordingly, this bail application is rejected. 6. However, the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail after 3 months. 7. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the learned court concerned through “FAX/email”. (Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) Date of Order:15.07.2026 Saurav Date of Uploading:15.07.2026