Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 2201 (JHR)

BUTA ALIAS NAIMUDDIN v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

A.B.A./937/2026 · 2026-02-19

Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2026:JHHC:4914 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI ---- A.B.A. No. 937 of 2026 ---- Buta @ Naimuddin, aged about 37 years, son of Jafruddin resident of Village Nawadih, PO and PS Karmatar, Dist. Jamtara .... Petitioner -- Versus -- The State of Jharkhand .... Opposite Party ---- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI --- For the Petitioner :- Mr. R.S. Mazumdar, Sr. Advocate For the State :- Mr. Rakesh Ranjan, Advocate ---- 2/19.02.2026 Heard learned counsels for petitioner and for State. 2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Jamtara Cyber P.S. Case No.61 of 2025, for offence registered under section 111(2)(b), 111(3), 111(4), 317(2), 317(4), 317(5), 318(4), 319(2), 336(3), 338, 340(2), 3(5) of BNS, and Section 66(B)(C)(D) of Information Technology Act and section 42(3)(e) of Telecommunication Act, pending in court of learned Special Judge, Cyber Crime, Jamtara. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and the name of the petitioner has come on confessional statement and the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent and in view of that, anticipatory bail to the petitioner may kindly be granted. 4. Learned State counsel opposes prayer and submits that serious allegations are there of indulging in cyber-crime against the 2026:JHHC:4914 2 petitioner and in view of that anticipatory bail to the petitioner may kindly be rejected. 5. Allegations against the petitioner is there of making available stolen ATM Card and 4 SIM Cards of other persons for the purpose of committing cyber-crime and anticipatory bail of the co- accused namely Sultan Ansari has already been rejected by this Court in ABA No.913 of 2026, and as such, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, and hence, prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is, hereby, rejected, and accordingly, this anticipatory bail application being A.B.A. No.937 of 2026 is, hereby, dismissed. ( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) 19.02.2026 SI/