[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Jharkhand High Court
Chandra Mohan Mandal vs The State Of Jharkhand ... ... Opp. Party on 17 February, 2026
Author: Anubha Rawat Choudhary
Bench: Anubha Rawat Choudhary
2026:JHHC:4483
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B.A. No. 10615 of 2025
Chandra Mohan Mandal, aged about 34 years, son of Pramod Kumar
Mandal, resident of Village Murlidih, P.O. & P.S. Karmatand, District
Jamtara, Jharkhand ... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand ... ... Opp. Party
---
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY
---
For the Petitioner : Mr. Zaid Ahmed, Advocate
For the Opp. Party : Mr. Shailendra Kumar Tiwari, Advocate
---
th
05/17 February 2026
1. Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in
custody in connection with Jamtara Cyber Crime P.S. Case No. 56 of 2025
for the offence registered under Sections 111(2)(b), 111(3), 111(4), 111(7),
317(2), 317(4), 317(5), 318(4), 319(2), 336(3), 338, 340(2) and 3(5) of the
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Sections 66(B) (C) and (D) of the Information
Technology Act and Sections 42(3)(e) of the Telecommunication Act, 2023,
now said to have been pending in the court of learned Special Judge, Cyber
Crime, Jamtara.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that except recovery of two
Mobile Sets and two SIMs in the said mobiles, there is no material against
the petitioner to connect him with the commission of Cyber offence and no
victim has been found. The learned counsel has also submitted that the
petitioner has no criminal antecedent and he is in custody since 26.08.2025
and charge-sheet has been submitted on 19.11.2025, but the charge has not
been framed. There are altogether ten charge-sheeted witnesses.
4. Learned counsel for the opposite party has opposed the prayer and has
submitted that the mobile phones as well as the SIMs are standing in the
name of different persons and the petitioner is not in a position to explain his
possession of the mobile phones and SIM Numbers. The learned counsel has
2026:JHHC:4483
further referred to paragraph 72 and 75 of the case diary to submit that the
complaint with regard to commission of cyber fraud using the aforesaid sims
/mobile phones have been found, which connects the petitioner from the
crime.
5. At this, the learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that one
co-accused, namely, Khogen Dan has been granted bail by a Co-ordinate
Bench of this Court vide order dated 08.12.2025 in B.A. No. 10027 of 2025.
6. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and considering the
fact that the mobile phones and SIMs recovered from the petitioner are in
the name of other persons, to which the petitioner has no explanation, and by
referring to the case diary, the learned counsel for the State has pointed out
that it has come in investigation that the cyber offence has been committed
by using these phones and SIMs, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the
petitioner on bail.
7. So far as grant of bail to the other co-accused, namely, Khogen Dan is
concerned, it appears that the facts of the present case are different and in the
present case, there is enough material against the petitioner in the case diary.
8. Accordingly, this bail application is rejected.
9. However, the State is directed to ensure prompt production of the
witnesses during trial.
10. Learned counsel for the State is directed to communicate a copy of
this order to the concerned authority to ensure prompt production of the
witnesses on the date as may be fixed by the learned trial court.
11. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the court concerned
through 'e-mail/FAX'.
(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.)
Dated: 17.02.2026
Uploaded On: 17.02.2026
Mukul/-
