( 2026:JHHC:22191 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 5194 of 2026 Mir Hamja Ansari, Son of Samad Ansari … … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Opp. Party --- CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY --- For the Petitioner : Mr. Sudhansu Kumar Deo, Advocate For the Opp. Party : Mr. Shailendra Kumar Tiwari, Spl. P.P. --- 04/27.07.2026 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 Deoghar Cyber P.S. Case No. 47 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 66 (B), 66 (C), 66 (D) and 84 (C) of I.T. Act, pending in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-II-Cum- Special Judge, Cyber Crime Cases, Deoghar. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent and he is in custody since 04.04.2026. Charge sheet has been submitted in this case. The learned counsel submits that one Mobile, one SIM Card and 04 ATM Cards are alleged to have been recovered from the possession of the petitioner. The ATM Cards are not in the name of the petitioner but the mobile and the SIM Card standing in the name of the petitioner. The learned counsel has further submitted that there has been no transaction to the ATM which has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner. 4. Learned counsel for the opposite party-State has opposed the prayer and has submitted that the petitioner is alleged to be the supplier of mobile/SIM/ATM in the name of other persons to the cyber criminals. He further submits that SIM Card was in the name of the name of other persons and not in the name of the petitioner. The learned counsel submits that recovered mobile reveals that numerous SIM Cards were used in the mobile and during investigation it has come in paragraph 50 that one person has stated that another person who used to work with him and on the basis of his Aadhar and PAN Card one account was opened and ATM Card was received by the said person and ultimately said ( 2026:JHHC:22191 ) 2 person had switched off the mobile. The learned counsel submits that one such ATM Card has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner. However, no money transaction has been found with respect to the ATM Card recovered from the possession of the petitioner so far. The investigation is still going on; however, charge sheet has been submitted. 5. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and considering the fact that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent and charge sheet has already been submitted, the petitioner above named is directed to be enlarged on bail on his furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rs. Twenty five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Additional Sessions Judge-II-Cum- Special Judge, Cyber Crime Cases, Deoghar, in connection with Deoghar Cyber P.S. Case No. 47 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 his 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 court below. 6. 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. 7. The instant bail application is allowed with the aforesaid conditions. (Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) Dated: 27.07.2026 Uploaded on: 28.07.2026 Binit/