( 2026:JHHC:20956 ) -1- A.B.A. No. 3171 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 3171 of 2026 Abdul Lateef Khan Pathan, aged about 55 years, S/o Abdul Rehman Khan, R/o Gausiya Town, Islampur Road, P.O. Old Hubli, P.S. Dharwad, District- Dharwad (Karnataka) … Petitioner -Versus- The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ----- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI ----- For the Petitioner : Mr. Lukesh Kumar, Advocate Mr. Abhay Prakash, Advocate Mr. Namashyu Kejriwal, Advocate For the State : Mr. Shailendra Kumar Tiwari, Spl.P.P. ----- 03/15.07.2026 Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing for the State. 2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Dhanbad Cyber Crime Case No.8/2026, registered for the offence under Sections 318(4), 319(2), 338, 340(2) of the BNS and Sections 66(C), 66(D) of the I.T. Act, pending in the Court of the learned Additional Sessions Judge-II cum Spl. Judge, Cyber Cases, Dhanbad. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case. He next submits that the name of the petitioner has come on confessional statement. He also submits that the petitioner is not involved in fraudulent transfer of Rs.50 Lakhs from the account of the informant. On these grounds, he submits that anticipatory bail may kindly be granted to the petitioner. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the State opposed the prayer and submits that the petitioner happened to be one of the Director of the Cooperative Society and in the said Society’s account the said amount has been transferred fraudulently from the account of the informant. He further ( 2026:JHHC:20956 ) -2- A.B.A. No. 3171 of 2026 submits that even regular bail petition of similarly situated co-accused has been rejected by the Coordinate Bench of this Court. On these grounds, he submits that the prayer for anticipatory bail may kindly be rejected. 5. The name of the petitioner has come on the confessional statement of co-accused, namely, Md. Afsar and they have adopted modus operandi of the conspiracy involving the petitioner in the offence of transfer of Rs.50 Lakhs fraudulently from the account of the informant and these facts have been noted in paras 9, 12, 13, 16 and 27 of the case diary. In the attending facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner and, as such, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is, hereby, rejected. 6. Accordingly, this application is dismissed. (Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Dated: 15th July, 2026 Ajay/