2026:JHHC:22244 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 5150 of 2026 Ramesh Kumar @ Ramesh Kumar Das, son of Sonu Das @ Sanu Das … … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Opposite Party --- CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY --- For the Petitioner : Mr. Arvind Kumar Choudhary, Advocate For the Opp. Party : Mr. Shailendra Kr. Tiwari, SPl. P.P. --- 03/28.07.2026 Heard the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the parties. 2. A counter-affidavit has been filed during the court proceedings, which is taken on record. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 15.12.2025 in connection with Cyber Crime Case No.35 of 2026, arising out of Deoghar (Cyber) P.S. Case No.167 of 2025, registered under Sections 111(2)(b), 111(3), 111(4), 319(2), 318(4), 336(3), 338, 340(2) & 61(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and sections 66(B), 66(C), 66(D) and 84(C) of the Information Technology Act, now pending in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge – II – cum – Special Judge, Cyber Crime Cases, Deoghar. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that one mobile is alleged to have been seized from the possession of the petitioner and one victim has been identified. The petitioner is also an accused in a case registered at Rajasthan and during investigation, two crime links have been found. He submits that the petitioner is in custody since 15.12.2025 and charge has been framed on 11.05.2026. 5. Learned counsel for the opposite party- State, on the other hand, has opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that it is a case of organized crime and the petitioner has criminal antecedent also. He further submits that the prayer for bail of the co-accused Khalid Ansari has been rejected by a coordinate Bench of this Court in B.A. No. 884 of 2026. 2026:JHHC:22244 2 6. After hearing the learned counsels for the parties and considering the fact that the case is of organized crime and the petitioner has another case also against him and victim has also been identified and the co-accused has been denied bail by coordinate bench , this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and hence, this bail application is rejected. 7. However, the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail after four months. 8. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the learned court concerned through “FAX/email”. (Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) Date of Order:28.07.2026 Pankaj Date of Uploading:29.07.2026