IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 11019 of 2024 1. Suraj Bhuiyan @ Chaku @ Natha age 20 years, Son of Raju Bhuiyan, Resident of Village- Chhapar P.O Binja Police Station Burmu, District- Ranchi, Jharkhand. 2. Arjun Ganjhu, age 19 years Son of Chandradeo Ganjhu, resident of Village Kurugadda, Post Office Binja and Police Station Burmu, District- Ranchi- Jharkhand ... … Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Opposite Party ------- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVNEET KUMAR ------ For the Petitioners : Mr. Prabhash Ch. Sinha, Advocate For the State : Mr. Prabir Kumar Chatterjee, APP -------- Order No. 02 / Dated 10th January, 2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State. 2. The petitioners are an accused in connection with Karedari P.S. Case No. 41 of 2024, registered under Sections 341, 323, 387, 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code and 27 of Arms Act, pending in the Court of Learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Hazaribagh. 3. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the gist of the allegation as set out in the F.I.R. is that the petitioners are alleged to have involved in the commission of offence of extortion along with other co- accused person. 4. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that they are not named in the FIR and their name have appeared on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused. Further it has been pointed out that the petitioners are in custody since 02.09.2024 and charge-sheet in this case has been submitted and therefore possibility of tampering the evidence is very remote. Further it has also been pointed out that there is one criminal case pending against these petitioners vide Barkagaon P.S. Case No.60 of 2024 dated 06.03.2024 registered under Sections 147, 148, 149, 447, 341, 385, 387 of the IPC and 17 C.L.A. Act as per the impugned order and therefore, petitioners deserve to be enlarged on bail. 2 B.A. No.11017 of 2024 5. On the other hand, the learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State has opposed the contentions raised on behalf of the petitioners and submitted that they are the member of banned extremist organisation, namely, TPC and there is one criminal antecedent against them and therefore they do not deserve to be enlarged on bail, although he did not controvert this fact that these petitioners have not been named in the FIR and their name have appeared on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused persons. 6. Having heard the parties, perused the records of this case. 7. In light of the forceful submission advanced on behalf of the petitioners and under the facts and circumstances of this case, these petitioners are directed to be enlarged 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 the Court of Learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Hazaribagh, in connection with Karedari P.S. Case No. 41 of 2024, subject to the condition that the petitioners will cooperate in the criminal proceeding pending in the learned Trial Court and they will remain present on each and every date of the criminal trial as and when required, failing which, appropriate order shall be passed by the learned Court below for the cancellation of the bail as per the provision of law. (Navneet Kumar, J.) Basant/S. Das