Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 10295 (JHR)

SHAMIM AKTHAR ALLIAS SAMIM AKTAR v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

B.A./3436/2025 · 2025-08-01

Anil Kumar Choudhary

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

( 2025:JHHC:21634 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 3436 of 2025 ------ 1. Samim Aktar @ Shamim Akthar, aged about 31 years, son of Maqbool Hussain, R/o Tara Nagar, P.O. and P.S. – Ratua, District –Malda (West Bengal) 2. Kalimuddin, aged about 41 years, son of Ebrahim, R/o Village –Jannagar, Ratua, P.O. and P.S. –Ratua, District – Malda (West Bengal). … Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioners : Mr. Suraj Kishore Prasad, Advocate For the State : Mrs. Bandana Sinha, Addl. P.P. ------ Order No.04 Dated- 01.08.2025 Heard the parties. The petitioners have moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with S.T. Case No. 288 of 2024 arising out of Rail Ranchi P.S. Case No.02 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under sections 328/379/34 of the Indian Penal Code. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioners administered intoxicating drug to the informant with intent to cause hurt to him to facilitate commission of the offence of theft while the informant was travelling in a train. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioners are all false and without putting him on Test Identification Parade, charge sheet has been submitted. It is next submitted that though charge has been framed but no witnesses have been examined as yet. It is then submitted that the petitioners have been in custody since 23.02.2024, as has been mentioned in paragraph no. 01 of the bail application. It is further submitted that the petitioners undertake to cooperate with the trial of the case and further undertake that they will not annoy or disturb the informant or the witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioners be admitted to bail. The learned Addl. P.P. opposes the prayer for bail. Considering the submissions of the counsels and the fact as discussed above, I am inclined to enlarge the above-named petitioners on bail. Accordingly, the petitioners are directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Judicial Commissioner -V, Ranchi, in connection with S.T. Case No. 288 of 2024 arising out of Rail Ranchi P.S. Case No.02 of 2024 with the condition that the petitioners will co-operate with the trial of the case and will furnish their mobile number and photocopy of the Aadhar Card with an undertaking that they will not change their mobile number during the trial of the case, with further condition that they will not annoy or disturb the informant or the witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Sonu-Gunjan/