( 2025:JHHC:18243 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 5409 of 2025 ------ Sumit Kumar, aged about 27 years, Son of Manoranjan Singh, Resident of Village –New By Pass Anisabad, Patna-2, P.O. – Anisabad, P.S. –Gardanibag, District –Patna (Bihar). … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Vishnu Prabhakar Pathak, Advocate : Mr. Shashank Shekhar No.2, Advocate For the State : Mr. Shailesh Kr. Sinha, Addl. P.P. ------ Order No.02 Dated- 07.07.2025 Heard the parties. The petitioner has moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with Namkum P.S. Case No.110 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under sections 103(1), 191(2), 191(3), 190, 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 109, 352 & 351(2)(3) of the B.N.S., 2023 and under Section 27 of the Arms Act. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner was the member of an unlawful assembly and in prosecution of common object of the assembly committed the murder of Sintu Munda and attempted to murder others. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false. It is then submitted that there is direct and specific allegation of assaulting Sintu Munda with lathi, danda and sword is upon Ram Kumar, son of Premdhan Singh, Pritam Yadav, son of Rabindra Ray, Vishal Yadav @ Valtu, son of Satrughana Ray and Sudhir Ray, son of Amar Ray and there is allegation against Raj Kumar Yadav of firing upon the informant party and the only allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner was abusing the members of the informant party with objectionable words by taking their caste name. It is next submitted that the co-accused female members have already been admitted to bail by this Court vide order dated 07.07.2025 in B.A. No. 5408 of 2025. It is then submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent as has been mentioned in para –14 of the bail application. It is next submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 16.03.2025, as has been mentioned in paragraph no. 01 of the bail application. It is further submitted that the petitioner undertakes to cooperate with the trial of the case and further undertakes that he 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 petitioner 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 petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to be released 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 Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi, in connection with Namkum P.S. Case No.110 of 2025 with the condition that the petitioner will co-operate with the trial of the case and will furnish his mobile number and photocopy of the Aadhar Card with an undertaking that he will not change his mobile number during the trial of the case, with further condition that he 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/