- 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 266 of 2025 ---- Pramod Kumar @ Pramod Singh … … Appellant Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Respondent ------- CORAM :HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Appellant : Mrs. Jasvindar Mazumdar, Advocate For the Respondent : Mr. Bhola Nath Ojha, APP -------- Order No. 03 : Dated 20th March, 2025 1. The instant appeal preferred under Section 21(4) of the National Investigation Agency Act, is directed against the order dated 28.01.2025 passed in A.B.P. No.301 of 2025 by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge-VII, Dhanbad, in connection with Putki P.S. Case No.23 of 2024, registered for the offence under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 337, 353, 307, 387 & 120B of the IPC, Section 27 of the Arms Act and Sections 3/4/5 of the Explosive Substance Act whereby and whereunder, the prayer for pre-arrest bail of the appellant has been rejected.. 2. It has been contended on behalf of learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant is absolutely innocent and has falsely been implicated in the instant case due to some ulterior motive. 3. It has further been contended that there is no recovery of any incriminating material from the physical or conscious - 2 - possession of the appellant and having no nexus with other co-accused persons as he is not the member of any gang. 4. Raising the ground of parity submission has been made that the identically placed co-accused persons, namely, Kapil Kumar Pawan @ Kapil Paswan & Anil Kumar Singh @ Mantu Singh (both in Cr. Appeal (DB) No.610 of 2024), Deepak Paswan, Karan Paswan @ Karan Prasad and Prem Yadav @ Prem Kumar Yadav have been granted the privilege of anticipatory bail by the coordinate Bench of this Court vide orders dated 14.05.2024, 28.08.2024, 29.08.2024 and 02.09.2024 passed in Cr. Appeal (DB) Nos.610 of 2024, 804 of 2024, 1096 of 2024 and 841 of 2024 respectively and case of the present appellant stands on similar footing. 5. Therefore, submission has been made by learned counsel for the appellant that the impugned order may be quashed and set aside. 6. While on the other hand, learned A.P.P. appearing for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail, however, he is fair enough to admit the fact that the cases of the aforesaid co-accused persons as referred above, who have already been granted the privilege of anticipatory bail by the coordinate Bench of this Court, are identically placed to that of the case of the present appellant. 7. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone across the finding recorded by the learned court in the - 3 - impugned order as also order granting pre-arrest bail of co- accused persons. 8. This Court considering the fact that identically placed co-accused persons, namely, Kapil Kumar Pawan @ Kapil Paswan & Anil Kumar Singh @ Mantu Singh (both in Cr. Appeal (DB) No.610 of 2024), Deepak Paswan, Karan Paswan @ Karan Prasad and Prem Yadav @ Prem Kumar Yadav have been granted the privilege of anticipatory bail by the coordinate Bench of this Court vide orders dated 14.05.2024, 28.08.2024, 29.08.2024 and 02.09.2024 passed in Cr. Appeal (DB) Nos.610 of 2024, 804 of 2024, 1096 of 2024 and 841 of 2024 respectively, therefore, there is no reason to take distinct view, so far as the case of the present appellant is concerned. 9. Considering the aforesaid fact, this Court is of the view that the impugned order needs to be interfered with. 10. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 28.01.2025 passed in A.B.P. No.301 of 2025 by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge-VII, Dhanbad, is hereby, quashed and set aside. 11. In view thereof, the instant appeal stands allowed. 12. On consideration of the aforesaid facts, this Court is inclined to extend the privilege of pre-arrest bail to the appellant. - 4 - 13. The appellant, above named, accordingly, is directed to surrender before the learned court below within 10 days and on his surrender, he shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad, in connection with Putki P.S. Case No.23 of 2024, subject to the conditions that the appellant shall co-operate in the trial and shall not absent himself on the date fixed without any cogent cause. In case of non-cooperation in trial, it will be left open upon the prosecuting agency to move before the concerned court for cancellation of bail bond. 14. Accordingly, the instant appeal stands disposed of. (Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.) (Gautam Kumar Choudhary, J.) Alankar/