Jharkhand High Court

B.A./10514/2026 of LAXMAN MANDAL ALIAS LAXMAN KUMAR MANDAL Vs THE STATE OF JHARKHAND on 6 November 2026

Cites 0, Cited by 0

1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 10514 of 2026 Laxman Mandal @ Laxman Kumar Mandal, aged about 28 years, son of Kodo Mandal, Resident of village- Nayadabar, P.O- Purri Gandey & P.S. Bengabad, District- Giridih, State Jharkhand. …. …. Petitioner Versus

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

B.A. No. 10514 of 2026

Laxman Mandal @ Laxman Kumar Mandal, aged about 28

years, son of Kodo Mandal, Resident of village- Nayadabar, P.O- Purri Gandey & P.S. Bengabad, District- Giridih, State Jharkhand.

….

…. Petitioner

Versus

The State of Jharkhand

….

….Opp. Party

…

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR RAI

For the Petitioner:

Mr. Rohan Mazumdar, Advocate

For the State:

Mr. Shailendra Kr. Tiwari, Spl. P.P.

…

Order No.02/dated: 06.11.2026

Citations and Judicial Treatment

No citing decisions in the index yet

Cited by

0

Decisions in the index citing it

Cites

0

Decisions referred to

In this index

0

Of the decisions it cites

Overruled / Questioned

0

No negative treatment found

Loading the citing and cited decisions…

1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.

2. Petitioner has been made accused in connection with Giridih (Cyber) P.S. Case No. 36 of 2023 for the offences registered under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120(B) and 34 of I.P.C and Sections 66-B, 66-C and 66-D of I.T. Act, pending in the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge- II-cum-Special Judge (Cyber Crime), Giridih.

3. Submission has been made on behalf of the petitioner that name of this petitioner surfaced in the present case from the mouth of co-accused person who apprehended at the spot and his house was raided from where allegedly mobile phone, SIM cards and other incriminating articles got recovered. He further submits that similarly situated co- accused persons have already been admitted to bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court in B.A. No. 3940 of 2024, B.A. No. 3278 of 2024 and B.A. No. 3887 of 2024. This petitioner is in judicial custody since 10.08.2026 and charge sheet has already been submitted and he has very fairly conceded to the fact that petitioner is having one case of similar nature to his credit. Upon aforesaid premise, prayer for bail has been made.

4. Learned Spl. P.P. for the State has opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and pointed out that one crime link has been found against the mobile phones/SIMs allegedly recovered from the house of this petitioner. He conceded to the fact that charge sheet has already been submitted.

5. Considering the fact that the petitioner is in judicial custody since 10.08.2026, charge sheet has already been submitted and similarly situated co-accused persons have already been admitted to bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

6. Accordingly, the petitioner, above named, is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty-Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Sessions Judge-II-cum-Special Judge (Cyber Crime), Giridih in connection with Giridih (Cyber) P.S. Case No. 36 of 2023, subject to the following conditions:-

(i) The above-named petitioner shall file an undertaking at the time of furnishing bail bonds before the court concerned stating therein that he shall not involve himself in similar type of offences in future.

(ii) He is directed to file an affidavit after a lapse of every three months from the date of release, before the court concerned stating therein that he is not involved/involved in any other similar type of offences on the date of filing of such affidavit before the court concerned.

(iii) Further, the petitioner shall appear before the trial court on each and every date of hearing, except any medical exigency.

7. It is further clarified that if the condition of filing of an affidavit is not complied by the above-named petitioner, then it deems to be violation of condition of this bail order and provides a ground for cancellation of bail and the prosecution shall proceed for the cancellation of bail of the petitioner by filing an appropriate application before the trial court in accordance with law.

8. In case of further involvement of this petitioner in similar type of cases, then the prosecution is at liberty to file an application for cancellation of bail of petitioner before the trial court on the ground of violation of the condition of bail and the trial court shall decide the application as expeditiously as possible considering the overall circumstances of the case.

(Arun Kumar Rai, J.)

06th November, 2026

R.K./Rajnish

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Sign in, for free, to download the court copy. Reading the full text here stays open to everyone.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead