2026:JHHC:10148 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 1282 of 2026 Miraj Ansari @ Meraj Ansari, son of Munawar Ansari @ Manowar Ansari … … 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. Rakesh Ranjan, APP --- 03/09.04.2026 Heard the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the parties. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 10.12.2025 in connection with Deoghar (Cyber) P.S. Case No. 166 of 2025, registered under Sections 111(2)(b), 111(3), 111(4), 319(2), 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2) & 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 read with 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, Deoghar. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that two mobile phones and one SIM card have been allegedly recovered from the possession of the petitioner and it is further alleged that so far as the petitioner is concerned, there is one victim in connection with the alleged offence. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also submitted that the SIM through which the call has been made was not recovered from the possession of the petitioner, but the description of the mobile used is matching. He has fairly submitted that the petitioner has one criminal antecedent. 5. Learned counsel for the opposite party- State, on the other hand, has opposed the prayer and has submitted that the alleged offences are of serious nature and the prescribed sentences are up to life imprisonment. 6. To this, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that, in 2026:JHHC:10148 2 fact, no case is made out against the petitioner. 7. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of this case and the fact that one victim has been identified during investigation so as to connect the petitioner’s mobile with the commission of cyber fraud coupled with the fact that the petitioner has one criminal antecedent, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and hence, this bail application is rejected. 8. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the learned court concerned through “FAX/email”. (Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) Date of Order:09.04.2026 Pankaj Date of Uploading:09.04.2026