(2025:JHHC:36118-DB) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. A (D.B.) No. 1420 of 2025 --------- 1. Suresh Murmu @ Shahrukh, aged about 24 years, son of Sunil Murmu, resident of Village-Fuljori, P.O., P.S. and District-Jamtara 2. Birbal Kisku aged about 26 years, son of Shivlal Kisku, resident of Village-Lakhanpur, P.O.-Kalajhari, P.S.-Karmatand, District-Jamtara … … Appellants Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Respondent --------- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA ---------- For the Appellants : Mr. Nisith Kr. Sahani, Advocate For the Resp. State : Mr. Pankaj Kumar, P.P. Mr. Vineet Kr. Vashistha, Spl.P.P. ----------- 03/Dated: 03rd December, 2025 1. Heard Mr. Nisith Kr. Sahani, learned counsel for the appellants and learned P.P. for the State. 2. This appeal is directed against the order dated 26.09.2025 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Bokaro in M.C.A No.827 of 2025 in connection with S.T. No.310 of 2024 arising out of G.R.P. Bokaro P.S. Case No.14 of 2024 (G.R. No.21 of 2024), whereby and whereunder, the prayer for bail of the appellants has been rejected. 3. It has been alleged that two minor children, who have been taken for human trafficking by the appellant No.1, were apprehended along with appellant No.1. 4. Submission has been advanced by learned counsel for the appellant No.1 that he is in custody since 07.06.2024. It has further been submitted that three witnesses are still left to be examined and both the (2025:JHHC:36118-DB) 2 victims, who have been recovered, were declared hostile by the prosecution. 5. So far as the appellant No.2 is concerned, learned counsel submits that there is no incriminating material against the appellant No.2 save and except the confessional statement of the appellant No.1. Learned counsel adds that the appellant No.2 is in custody since 11.06.2024. 6. Mr. Pankaj Kumar, learned P.P. has submitted pursuant to the order dated 02.12.2025 that out of 11 charge-sheeted witnesses, 7 witnesses have been examined and the same finds reflection in the impugned order dated 26.09.2025, which indicates that there has been no further progress in the trial pursuant to the rejection of the prayer of bail of the appellants. 7. On consideration of the period of custody undergone by the appellants and the fact that the victims have been declared hostile by the prosecution, we, while setting aside the order dated 26.09.2025 passed in M.C.A No.827 of 2025 in connection with S.T. No.310 of 2024 arising out of G.R.P. Bokaro P.S. Case No.14 of 2024 (G.R. No.21 of 2024), direct the appellants be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge- 1st-cum-Special Judge, Bokaro, subject to the condition that both the appellants shall remain physically present before the learned trial court (2025:JHHC:36118-DB) 3 on each and every date till the conclusion of the trial unless prevented by sufficient cause. 8. This appeal is allowed. (Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J.) (Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.) 03/12/2025 Pappu/- Uploaded on 06/12/2024