( 2026:JHHC:4599 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.10689 of 2025 ------ Ankit Kumar Agarwal, aged about 40 years, S/o Dilip Kumar Agarwal, R/o-Netaji Subhash Nagar, Gali No.2, P.O.-Hehal, P.S.- Sukhdeonagar (Pandra O.P.), Dist.-Ranchi, Jharkhand. … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Rahul Pandey, Advocate For the State : Mr. Santosh Kr. Shukla, Addl.P.P. ------ Order No:-03 Dated:-17-02-2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Cyber P.S. Case No.152 of 2024 corresponding to G.R. Case No.20 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120 of the Indian Penal Code & Section 66B, 66C, 66D of the Information Technology Act. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner is a hardened criminal, habitually involved in commission of cybercrime and he is involved in 9 other cases. It is submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is next submitted that there is no victim of the case. It is next submitted that the petitioner undertakes that he will co-operate with the trial of the case. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 27.06.2024 as mentioned in para-01 of the instant bail application. Hence it is submitted that the petitioner be released on bail. Learned Spl. P.P. appearing for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for bail and submits that the petitioner is an active member of gang of criminals having connection with international gangsters and the petitioner used to give credentials of internet banking to the co-accused Yogesh Agrawal who used to frequently visit Hongkong to give the same to his Chinese associates, hence, in view of the criminal antecedents of the petitioner, there is every chance of the petitioner absconding or tampering with evidence, if released on bail. It is therefore submitted that the petitioner ought not be released on bail. Considering the serious nature of allegation against the petitioner and in view of the criminal antecedents of the petitioner, the chance of the petitioner absconding or tampering with evidence, if released on bail, this Court is not inclined to admit the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the above-named petitioner is rejected. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) 17/02/2026 Abhiraj/