Jharkhand High Court
B.A./10206/2026 of MOHAN DAS @ MOHAN KUMAR DAS Vs THE STATE OF JHARKHAND on 5 November 2026
Citation No. ( 2026:JHHC:32443 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.10206 of 2026 Mohan Das @ Mohan Kumar Das, aged about 32 years, S/o Bishan Das, R/o village-Barguniya, P.O. + P.S. Devipur, District-Deoghar …. …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand ….
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B.A. No.10206 of 2026
Mohan Das @ Mohan Kumar Das, aged about 32 years, S/o Bishan Das, R/o village-Barguniya, P.O. + P.S. Devipur, District-Deoghar
….
…. Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand
….
…. Opp. Party
…
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR RAI
For the Petitioner:
Mr. Rahul Ranjan, Advocate
For the State:
Mr. Shailendra Kr. Tiwari, Spl. P.P.
…
Order No.02/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. Petitioner has been made accused in connection with Deoghar Cyber P.S. Case No. 78 of 2026 for the offences registered under Sections 319(2), 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 61(2), and 3(5) of B.N.S,2023 and Sections 66-B, 66-C, 66-D and 84-C of the I.T. Act, pending in the Court of the learned Additional Sessions Judge-II-cum-Special Judge, Cyber Crime Cases, Deoghar.
2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that similarly situated one of the co-accused has already been admitted to bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in B.A.No. 8285 of 2026 vide order dated 29.09.2026 and this petitioner is in judicial custody since 21.05.2026. He very fairly conceded to the fact that petitioner is having one case of similar nature to his credit. However, at the same breath he submitted that petitioner is no more required for further investigation and petitioner is ready to abide by any term and condition imposed by this Court. Upon aforesaid premise, prayer for bail has been made.
3. Learned Spl. P.P. opposed the prayer of bail on the premise that crime links have been found against the mobile phone which was being used by this petitioner and even the SIM was in the name of other person and this petitioner is having one criminal case of similar nature and one victim has also been identified in the present case.
4. Case record reveals that on the basis of secret information, raid was conducted and this petitioner along with other co- accused got apprehended and from their respective possession mobile phones/SIMs got recovered and during course of investigation this mobile phone was connected with the crime links and one victim has also been identified.
5. Considering the fact that this petitioner is in judicial custody since 21.05.2026 as stated by the learned Counsel at Bar and charge-sheet has already been submitted and similarly situated co-accused has already been enlarged on bail, therefore, this Court is inclined to grant bail to this petitioner.
6. Accordingly, the petitioner, above-named, is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (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 Cases, Deoghar in connection with Deoghar Cyber P.S. Case No. 78 of 2026 with 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) The above-named petitioner shall also 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, this 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 of this petitioner by filing an appropriate application before the trial court in accordance with law.
8. In case of further involvement of petitioner in similar type of cases, the prosecution is at liberty to file an application for cancellation of bail of this petitioner 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 circumstances of the case.
(Arun Kumar Rai, J.)
5th November, 2026
P.K.S./Suman
Uploaded