2026:JHHC:12732 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 11683 of 2025 Dinesh Kumar Jaiswal, Son of Premnath Jaiswal … … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Opposite Party --- CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY --- For the Petitioner : Mr. Abhay Kr. Chaturvedy, Advocate For the Opp. Party : Mr. Shailendra Kr. Tiwari, Spl. P.P. --- 08/30.04.2026 Heard the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the parties. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 03.08.2025 in connection with Ranchi Cyber Crime P.S. Case No. 88 of 2025, registered under Sections 318(2), 318(3), 318(4), 319(2), 336(2), 336(3), 338, 340(2) and 61(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and sections 66(B), 66(C) and 66(D) of Information Technology Act, now pending in the court of learned Additional Judicial Commissioner-II-cum Special Judge, Cyber Crime, Ranchi. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case, rather the petitioner is a victim. He submits that though the cheated amount to the extent of Rs. 26,68,050/- has been found in the IndusInd Bank account of the petitioner, but the said bank account was opened by misleading the petitioner and by taking his signature. The bank account was never being operated by the petitioner. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has also submitted that the petitioner is in custody since 03.08.2025 and co-accused namely, Goyani Hardikbhai Karamshibhai @ Goyani Hardik Bhai Karamsibha has been granted bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 19.02.2026 passed in B.A. No. 11401 of 2025. 5. Learned counsel for the opposite party- State, on the other hand, has opposed the prayer. 6. After hearing the learned counsels for the parties, this Court 2026:JHHC:12732 2 finds that it is not in dispute that the bank account was opened in IndusInd Bank in the name of Jaiswal Enterprises in which the petitioner is a proprietor and the defrauded amount was transferred in his account amounting to Rs. 26,68,050/- and thereafter, the amount was further transferred to other account. So far as the bail granted to the co-accused namely, Goyani Hardikbhai Karamshibhai @ Goyani Hardik Bhai Karamsibha by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court is concerned, said co-accused was granted bail primarily on the ground that he had no concern with the alleged offence. 7. Accordingly, this Court is of the view that the transaction involved in the present case is directly linked with the bank account standing in the name of the petitioner. The case of the petitioner does not stand on identical footing as that of the aforesaid co-accused. 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:30.04.2026 Pankaj Date of Uploading:04.05.2026