High CourtsSingle Bench

Kalimuddin Ansari @ Kalumuddin vs State Of Jharkhand

Jharkhand High Court · Decided on 26 November 2020 · Citation: (2020) 11 JH CK 0073

HON’BLE JUDGES
Anil Kumar Choudhary, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 34, 120B, 419, 420 · Information Technology Act, 2000 — Section 66(C), 66 (D)
CASE NUMBER
Bail Application No. 8914 Of 2020
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

18 paragraphs · 335 words

Heard the parties through video conferencing.

Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to remove the defects pointed out by the stamp reporter within two weeks after the lockdown is over.

In view of personal undertaking given by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the defects pointed out by the stamp reporter are ignored for the

present.

The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Cyber Case No.102 of 2020 arising out of Dhanbad Cyber P.S. Case No.44 of 2020

registered under Sections 419/420/120(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 66 (C), 66 (D) of the Information Technology Act.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner fled away on seeing the police personnel and

on search from the possession of the petitioner mobile phone, debit cards and passbooks were seized and on interrogation the petitioner confessed that

he has come from Jamtara to Dhanbad for withdrawing money connected with cyber fraud. It is submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is

false. It is also submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 16.08.2020 and he has no criminal antecedent as is mentioned in para-11 of the

instant bail application. It is next submitted that there is no allegation against the petitioner that the mobile phone seized from him was utilized for any

cyber-crime. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner undertakes to co-operate with the trial of the case. Hence it is submitted that the petitioner be

released on bail.

Learned Addl. P.P. opposes the prayer for bail.

Considering the facts of this case, the above named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty

five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-IInd, Dhanbad in connection with

Cyber Case No.102 of 2020 arising out of Dhanbad Cyber P.S. Case No.44 of 2020 with the condition that he will co-operate with the trial of the

case.