[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Jharkhand High Court
Rohit Kumar Mandal vs 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. 11517 of 2025
Rohit Kumar Mandal, aged about 24 years, son of Late Pradeep Kumar
Mandal, resident of village Bistopur, P.O. & P.S. Narayanpur, District
Jamtara ... ... Petitioner
Versus
State of Jharkhand ... ... Opp. Party
---
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY
---
For the Petitioner : Mr. Kaushik Sarkhel, Advocate
For the Opp. Party : Mr. Shailendra Kumar Tiwari, Advocate
---
th
06/17 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 has submitted that the petitioner has
been falsely implicated in this case and he is in custody since 26.08.2025. He
submits that the charge-sheet has been submitted on 19.11.2025, but the
charge has not been framed so far. He submits that two mobile phones, four
SIMs and certain ATM cards have been recovered from the possession of the
petitioner and there is no material to link the petitioner with the cyber-crime.
The learned counsel submits that one SIM was in the name of Bablu Roy,
who is the resident of Midnapur but he is not amongst the charge-sheeted
witnesses.
4. 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.
5. Learned counsel for the opposite party has opposed the prayer and has
submitted that out of four SIMs, one SIM was standing in the name of other
persons, to which the petitioner has no explanation. He submits that the
2026:JHHC:4483
mobile phones and the SIMs recovered from the possession of the petitioner
were used for commission of cyber offence. The learned counsel has referred
to Whatsapp chat which has been recorded in paragraph 108 of the case
diary. The learned counsel has also referred to paragraph 69 of the case diary
to submit that the entire chart has been mentioned therein. He submits that
numerous transactions and Whatsapp chats have been mentioned in the case
diary and during the period from 26.08.2024 to 26.08.2025, an amount of Rs.
61,40,374/- was deposited through various UPI transactions and during this
period, total Rs. 61,30,820/- was also withdrawn.
6. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and considering the
materials on record including Whatsapp chats and the fact that one mobile
SIM standing in the name of different person has been recovered from the
petitioner, to which the petitioner is unable to account for. Further, one
recovered SIM was in the name of Bablu Roy but he has been not made a
charge-sheeted witness as he could not be traced and it is alleged that the
petitioner had got SIM fraudulently issued in the name of Bablu Roy. In
view of the aforesaid materials found in the case diary, this Court is not
inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, this bail application is
rejected.
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.
8. However, the State is directed to ensure prompt production of the
witnesses during trial.
9. 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.
10. 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/-
