Jharkhand High Court
Lalchand Mandal vs The State Of Jharkhand ... Opposite ... on 16 May, 2018
Author: Ananda Sen
Bench: Ananda Sen
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B.A. No. 1517 of 2018
WITH
B.A. 1611 of 2018
----
Lalchand Mandal ... Petitioner
[in B.A. No.1517 of 2018]
Kishan Khanti @ Kishan Khantee ... Petitioner
[in B.A. No.1611 of 2018]
-versus-
The State of Jharkhand ... Opposite Party
[in both the cases]
----
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANDA SEN
----
For the Petitioners: Mr. R.S. Mazumdar, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Nishant Kumar Roy, Advocate
Mr. Kaushik Sarkhel, Advocate
For the State : A.P.P.
----
7/ 16.05.2018 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
Petitioners are accused for allegedly committing the offence punishable under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 66(B)(C)(D) of the Information Technology Act, in connection with Nala Police Station Case No.1 of 2017 corresponding to G.R. No.16 of 2017, pending in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Jamtara.
Allegation is of committing cyber crime. It is alleged that these petitioners are involved in transferring money in a fraudulent manner from the account of informant.
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, Kishan Khanti, submits that his ATM Cards and other documents were taken away by some persons, for which he had already filed a complaint, which was registered as Cyber Crime FIR No. 14 of 2017 in the State of West Bengal and thereafter his account was used by cyber criminals for which he cannot be made an accused in this case.
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, Lalchand Mandal, submitted that the SIM Cards, which were recovered, did not belong to the petitioner, rather the same belong to Dinesh Paswan. It is submitted that there is no evidence of transaction in his account.
Learned A.P.P. appearing for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioners. He submits that SIM Cards were fraudulently -: 2 :- obtained in the name of Dinesh Paswan, who belongs from the State of Bihar. He submits that paragraph 102 of the Case Diary clearly suggests that said Dinesh Paswan is very poor person and his documents were used by the cyber criminals and SIM was obtained in his name by the cyber criminals. It is also submitted that there are sufficient materials to suggest that money were transferred electronically through e-wallet and thereafter to the bank account of the accused persons. It is submitted that the money from the account of the informant was transferred to Paytm (e- wallet) and thereafter the same was transferred to the account of Kishan Khanti. It is also submitted that the mobile phone, which was in possession of Lalchand Mandal, was used with the SIM Card, which was obtained in the name of Dinesh Paswan. It is further submitted that the Case Diary will also suggest that the amount has been transferred in the account of Kishan Khanti. He submits that the accused have also confessed their guilt, which is corroborated with other materials collected during investigation in this case.
After hearing the counsel for the parties and after going through the records, I find that the amount, which was transferred fraudulently from the account of the informant was sent to Paytm (e-wallet) and thereafter the same was transferred in the account of Kishan Khanti. Further, I find that SIM Card, which were fraudulently obtained by the petitioner, were used by the petitioner, Lalchand Mandal. Thus, there are sufficient materials against the petitioners to suggest their involvement in the crime.
In view of the aforesaid facts, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner in B.A. No.1517 of 2018, namely, in Lalchand Mandal, and the petitioner in B.A. No.1611 of 2018, namely, Kishan Khanti @ Kishan Khantee, in connection with Nala Police Station Case No.01 of 2017 corresponding to G.R. No.16 of 2017, pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Jamtara, is hereby rejected.
Presence of the Investigating Officer, who is present with the Case Diary to assist the A.P.P., is dispensed with.
These two applications stand dismissed.
( Ananda Sen, J.) Kumar/Cp-03