IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. A. (DB) No. 853 of 2025 -------- Ranvijay Paswan, aged about 30 years old, S/o Mukhlal Paswan, resident of village Sonar Dangal, P.O. & P.S.-Nirsha, Dist. Dhanbad, Jharkhand ... ... Appellant Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Respondent ----- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA -------- For the Appellant : Mr. Kaushik Sarkhel, Advocate For the State : Mr. Vineet Kr. Vashistha, Spl.P.P. For the Informant : Mr. Saman Ahmad, Advocate -------- Order No. 03/ Dated: 17th September, 2025 Heard Mr. Kaushik Sarkhel, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. Vineet Kr. Vashistha, learned Spl.P.P. assisted by Mr. Saman Ahmad, learned counsel appearing for the Indian Oil Corporation. 2. This appeal is directed against the order dated 20.05.2025 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-III, Jamtara in Misc. Criminal Application No. 443 of 2025, arising out of Mihijam P.S. Case No. 76 of 2022, whereby and whereunder the prayer for bail of the appellant has been rejected. 3. It has been alleged that theft was committed from the Haldia-Baroni Pipeline and the total quantity of diesel stolen was about 30,000 Liter worth Rs. 28,44,600/-. 4. Submission has been advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant has been implicated on the confessional statement of co-accused Pankaj Singh and Raj Kiran Raka. It has been submitted that appellant is in custody since 04.04.2025 and nothing was recovered from the conscious possession of the appellant. It has also been submitted that the appellant does not have any criminal antecedent. 2 Cr. A. (DB) No. 853 of 2025 5. Mr. Vineet Kr. Vashistha, learned Spl. P.P. appearing for the State has opposed the prayer for bail of the appellant but has not disputed the aforesaid facts. 6. Regard being had to the above, we while setting aside the order dated 20.05.2025 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-III, Jamtara in Misc. Criminal Application No. 443 of 2025, arising out of Mihijam P.S. Case No. 76 of 2022, direct the appellant to be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned Addl. Sessions Judge-III, Jamtara. 7. Accordingly, this appeal stands allowed and disposed of. (Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J.) (Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.) 17.09.2025 Basant/Arpit