IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 1244 of 2024 -------- Suresh Rajwar aged about 58 years, S/o Late Jatan Ram @ Jatan Rajwar, R/o Village Dandila, P.O. Bilaspur & P.S. Hussainabad, Distt. Palamau, Jharkhand ... ... Appellant Versus The State of Jharkhand …… Respondent ----- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVNEET KUMAR -------- For the Appellant : Mr. Surendra Prasad Sinha, Advocate For the State : Mr. Anup Pawan Topno, APP -------- Order No. 06/ Dated: 27th January, 2025 1. The instant appeal filed under Section 21 (4) of the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008, is directed against the order dated 06.09.2024 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-III, Palamau at Daltonganj, in B.P. No. 403 of 2024, by which the prayer for regular bail of the appellant in connection with Haidarnagar P.S. Case No.52 of 2024, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 385, 387, 435, 427, 506 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 17 of C.L.A. Act and Sections 10/13 of UAPA Act, has been rejected. 2. It has been contended on behalf of the appellant that it is a case where the appellant has falsely been implicated merely over hearing the name of the appellant by the police personnel, who subsequently has been made informant to the present case. 3. So far as the status of the present case is concerned, even the case has not been committed yet and thereof the charge has not been framed while the appellant is languishing in judicial custody since, 29.06.2024 and the appellant has no criminal antecedent. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant based upon the aforesaid grounds has submitted that it is a fit case to interfere with the impugned order. 5. While on the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-State has vehemently opposed the prayer to interfere with the impugned order and has contended by referring to the material available in the case diary wherein the material has been surfaced in course of investigation. The implication of the present appellant based 2 Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 1244 of 2024 upon the over hearing the name of the appellant has also been taken as a ground. The learned State Counsel based upon the aforesaid grounds has submitted that it is therefore not a fit case to interfere with the impugned order. 6. This Court has heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone across the findings recorded by the learned trial court in the impugned order as also material as collected in course of the investigation as available in the case diary. 7. The fact about the implication of the present appellant is based upon over hearing the name of the present appellant by the police personnel who subsequently have become informant. It is further evident from the fact that the case is at the stage of commitment and even the charge has not been framed and the appellant is languishing in judicial custody since 29.06.2024 and the appellant has no criminal antecedent. 8. This Court considering the aforesaid fact is of view that the impugned order needs to be interfered with. 9. Accordingly, the order dated 06.09.2024 passed in B.P. No. 403 of 2024 in connection with Haidarnagar P.S. Case No.52 of 2024, is hereby quashed and set aside. 10. In view thereof, the instant appeal stands allowed. 11. In consequence thereof, the appellant, above named, is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Palamau at Daltonganj in connection with Haidarnagar P.S. Case No.52 of 2024 subject to the condition that the appellant will cooperate in the trial and shall appear on each and every date before the learned trial court, failing which, the learned trial court is at liberty to take appropriate course in accordance with law. 12. Accordingly, the instant appeal stands disposed of (Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.) (Navneet Kumar, J.) Basant/S.Das