Jharkhand High Court
B.A./10025/2026 of HEMANT DAS Vs THE STATE OF JHARKHAND on 5 November 2026
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 10024 of 2026 Jay Kumar Das, aged about 23 years, S/O - Alok Das, R/O - Pandeydih, P.O +P.S. - Jamtara, District - Jamtara. …. …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand …. ….Opp. Party With B.A. No. 10025 of
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B.A. No. 10024 of 2026
Jay Kumar Das, aged about 23 years, S/O - Alok Das, R/O - Pandeydih, P.O +P.S. - Jamtara, District - Jamtara.
….
…. Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand
….
….Opp. Party
With
B.A. No. 10025 of 2026
Hemant Das, aged about 34 years, S/O- Halipad Das, R/O- Bewa, P.O +P.S. - Mihijam, District - Jamtara.
….
…. Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand
….
….Opp. Party
…
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR RAI
For the Petitioner(s):
Mr. Rahul Ranjan, Advocate
For the State:
Mr. Abhay Kr. Tiwari, A.P.P.
…
Order No.03/dated: 05.11.2026
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 both these bail applications are arising out of same FIR being Jamtara Cyber Crime P.S. Case No. 48 of 2026, therefore, these are heard together and are disposed of by this common order.
2. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.
3. Petitioners have been made accused in connection with Jamtara Cyber Crime P.S. Case No. 48 of 2026 for the offences registered under Sections 111(2)(b), 318(4), 319(2), 336(3), 338, 340(2) and 3(5) of B.N.S, 2023, Sections 66-B, 66-C and 66-D of I.T. Act and Section 42(3)(e) of Telecommunication Act, 2023, pending in the Court of learned Special Judge, Cyber Crime, Jamtara.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that these two petitioners are having clean antecedent, however, he very fairly conceded to the fact that crime links and victims have been traced out during the course of investigation, but at the same time, submission has been made that these two petitioners are in custody since 31.07.2026 and charge sheet has already been submitted. It is also submitted that one of the co-accused, namely, Vikram Dan has also been admitted to bail by this Court in B.A. No. 10195 of 2026. Upon aforesaid premise, prayer for bail has been made.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State conceded to the fact that as far as petitioner Jay Kumar Das is concerned, three victims have been identified whereas in case of petitioner Hemant Das also, three victims have been identified during the course of investigation and also conceded to the fact that these two petitioners are having no criminal antecedent.
6. Considering the fact that these petitioners are in judicial custody since 31.07.2026 and having no criminal antecedent and charge sheet has already been submitted, therefore, this Court is inclined to grant bail to both the above named petitioners.
7. 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 Special Judge, Cyber Crime, Jamtara in connection with Jamtara Cyber Crime P.S. Case No. 48 of 2026, subject to the following conditions:
(i) The above-named petitioners individually shall file 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 individually 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.
8. 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.
9. 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.)
05th November, 2026
Rajnish/