Jharkhand High Court
B.A./10505/2026 of MAKSUD MIYAN Vs STATE OF JHARKHAND on 6 November 2026
HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 10502 of 2026 -------- Riyaz Ansari @ Riyaj Ansari, son of Sarful Ansari @ Sarful Miyan aged about 24 years, resident of village Kapsa, Post Office Sarath, Police Station Sarath, District-Deoghar, Jharkhand. …… Petitioner Versus The State
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B.A. No. 10502 of 2026
--------
Riyaz Ansari @ Riyaj Ansari, son of Sarful Ansari @ Sarful Miyan aged about 24 years, resident of village Kapsa, Post Office Sarath, Police Station Sarath, District-Deoghar, Jharkhand.
…… Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand
…... Opposite Party
with
B.A. No. 10505 of 2026
--------
Maksud Miyan, son of Sarafat Mian, aged about 40 years, resident of village Sumdari, Post Office Kunda, Police Station - Kunda, District-Deoghar, Jharkhand.
…… Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand
…... Opposite Party
with
B.A. No. 10508 of 2026
--------
Faizan Ansari @ Faijan Ansari, son of Taslim Miyan, aged about 25 years, resident of village Kapsa, Post Office Sarath, Police Station Sarath, District-Deoghar, Jharkhand.
…… Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand
…... Opposite Party
…
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR RAI
For the Petitioner(s):
Mr. Lalit Yadav, Advocate
For the State:
Mr. Shailendra Kr. Tiwari, Spl. P.P.
…
Order No.02/dated: 06.11.2026
Citations and Judicial Treatment
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…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Since all these bail applications are arising out of same FIR being Deoghar Cyber P.S. Case no. 109 of 2026, therefore, these are heard together and are decided by this common order.
2. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.
3. Petitioners have been made accused in connection with Deoghar Cyber P.S. Case no. 109 of 2026 for the offences registered under Sections 111(2)(b), 111(3), 111(4), 319(2), 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 61(2) and 3(5) of B.N.S, 2023 and under Sections 66-B, 66-C, 66-D and 84-C of I.T. Act, pending in the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge II-cum-Spl. Judge, Cyber Crime Cases, Deoghar.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that petitioners are in judicial custody since 29.07.2026 and charge sheet has already been submitted. It is further submitted that as far as petitioners Riyaz Ansari @ Riyaj Ansari and Maksud Miyan are concerned, they are having no criminal antecedent, however, the petitioner Faizan Ansari @ Faijan Ansari is having one case to his credit of similar nature. Upon aforesaid premise, prayer for bail has been made.
5. Learned Spl. P.P. for the State has opposed the prayer for bail and pointed out that against the mobile phone used by the petitioner Riyaz Ansari @ Riyaj Ansari four crime links and one victim have been traced and against the mobile phone used by the petitioner Maksud Miyan ten crime links and one victim have been traced and seven crime links and one victim have been traced against the mobile phone used by the petitioner Faizan Ansari @ Faijan Ansari during the course of investigation.
6. Learned Spl. P.P. for the State conceded to the fact that as far as the petitioners Riyaz Ansari @ Riyaj Ansari and Maksud Miyan are concerned, they are having no criminal antecedent, however, the petitioner Faizan Ansari @ Faijan Ansari is having one case to his credit.
7. Considering the fact that these petitioners are in judicial custody since 29.07.2026 and as stated by the learned counsel at Bar that charge sheet has already been submitted and petitioners are no more required for further investigation, therefore, this Court is inclined to grant bail to these petitioners.
8. Accordingly, the above-named petitioners, 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 the learned Additional Sessions Judge II-cum-Spl. Judge, Cyber Crime Cases, Deoghar in connection with Deoghar Cyber P.S. Case no. 109 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) These petitioners are 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.
9. It is further clarified that if the condition of filing of 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 and the prosecution shall proceed for the cancellation of bail of these petitioners by filing an appropriate application before the trial court in accordance with law.
10. In case of further involvement of these petitioners in similar type of cases, the prosecution is at liberty to file an 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 application as expeditiously as possible considering the overall circumstances of the case.
(Arun Kumar Rai, J.)
06th November, 2026
R.K./Rajnish