B.A./7683/2026 of RAVI KUMAR VERMA Vs THE STATE OF JHARKHAND on 6 November 2026

1. These bail applications have been arisen out of the same

F.I.R. being Ramgarh Cyber P.S. Case No. 08 of 2026. As such, they are being heard together and decided by this common order.

2. Petitioners have been made accused in connection with Ramgarh Cyber P.S. Case No. 08 of 2026 registered for the offences under Sections 111(2)(b), 111(3), 111(4), 316(2), 317(4) 318(4) and 319(2) of B.N.S., 2023 and Sections 66-C and 66-D of I.T. Act pending in the court of learned Court of C.J.M., Ramgarh.

3. Mr. A.K. Kashyap, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners in B.A. Nos. 7683 of 2026 and 8078 of 2026, submitted that there is an allegation that the petitioners, namely, Ravi Kumar Verma and Rahul Gupta, along with another co-accused person, namely, Ajay Sharma in B.A. No. 10646 of 2026, are said to have opened an account under the MSME Scheme in the name of Sri Ganesh Enterprises. The said account is alleged to be a mule account, and it is stated that all the partners derived benefits from the proceeds of the cyber crime which were transferred to the said account. However, learned Senior Counsel, along with Mr. Shailesh Poddar, learned counsel for the petitioners, jointly submitted that the petitioners are in judicial custody since 30.04.2026 and 22.07.2026, respectively, and the charge-sheet has already been submitted. It is further submitted that these petitioners are no longer required for further investigation.

4. Mr. Rahul Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner, namely, Sonu Jha @ Sonu Kumar Jha in B.A. No. 6913 of 2026, submitted that the petitioner was apprehended on 30.04.2026 and has been in judicial custody since then. It is alleged that the MSME account holder had a nexus with Ritesh Agrawal @ Munna, who used the said account as a mule account, and subsequently, Ritesh Agrawal @ Munna further engaged this petitioner and the said account was also used as a mule account by this petitioner. Learned counsel further submitted that the investigation is concluded and all the materials have also been collected during course of investigation, therefore, this petitioner is no longer required for further investigation.

5. Learned counsel for this petitioner namely, Sonu Jha @ Sonu Kumar Jha in B.A. No. 6913 of 2026 very fairly conceded to the fact that one criminal case is pending against this petitioner, however, the petitioner has already been admitted to bail in the said case.

6. Learned Spl.P.P. for the State has opposed the prayer for bail of these petitioners on the ground that a total amount of Rs.31,49,800/- has been transferred to the said mule account on different dates and these petitioners are beneficiaries of the cyber crime. It is further submitted that there is every possibility that, if these petitioners are released on bail, there is likelihood that they would again indulge themselves in similar types of activities.

7. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

8. Considering the fact that these petitioners are in judicial custody since 30.04.2026 and 22.07.2026 respectively and the charge-sheet has already been submitted and the petitioners are no longer required for further investigation and nothing has been brought to the notice of this Court on behalf of the State to indicate that, if these petitioners would be released on bail, they would tamper with the prosecution evidence or flee from justice, therefore, this Court is inclined to grant bail to these petitioners.

9. Accordingly, petitioners above named, are directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand) each, with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned Court of C.J.M., Ramgarh in connection with Ramgarh Cyber P.S. Case No. 08 of 2026, subject to the following conditions:

(i) The above named petitioners shall file individually an undertaking at the time of furnishing bail bonds before the court concerned stating therein that they shall not involve themselves in similar type of offences in future.

(ii) The petitioners, namely, Ravi Kumar Verma, Rahul Gupta and Ajay Sharma are directed to file individually an affidavit after a lapse of every six months from the date of release and the petitioner, namely, Sonu Jha @ Sonu Kumar Jha 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 they are not involved/involved in any other similar type of offences on the date of filing of such affidavit before the court concerned.

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

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

11. In case of further involvement of these petitioners in similar type of cases, the prosecution is at liberty to file application for cancellation of bail of these petitioners before the trial court on the ground of violation of the condition of bail and the trial court shall decide the said application as expeditiously as possible considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case.

(Arun Kumar Rai, J.)

06.11.2026 Umesh./Abhishek