SURENDRA TUBID ALIAS SUNIL TUBID v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND
B.A./4003/2025 · 2025-06-13
Anil Kumar Choudhary
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 7556 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 7556 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[2025:JHHC:15426]
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B.A. No. 4003 of 2025
Surendra Tubid @ Sunil Tubid, aged about 25 years, S/o Late Gardi Tubid, Resident of Village Hathimanda, P.O. & P.S.- Tonto, Dist. West Singhbhum, Jharkhand.
… Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand … Opp. Parties
Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
For the Petitioner : Mr. Anjani Kumar , Adv. For the State : Mr. V.S. Sahay , Addl. PP.
02 / 13.06.2025
Heard the parties. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Tonto P.S. Case No. 39 of 2024, instituted under Sections 308(3), 308(4), 308 (5) of B.N.S. , 2023 and 27 of the Arms Act.
Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner indulged in extortion of money of Rs. 10,00,000/- and threatened the informant and his men with the fire arms. It is submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false and the petitioner has not been put on TIP. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent, as mentioned in paragraph 19 of the bail application. It is next submitted that the petitioner has been in jail custody since 30.11.2024 , as mentioned in para 22 of this bail application. It is next submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that though charge has been framed but no witness has been examined so far. It is next submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is ready and willing to co-operate with the trial of the case and undertakes neither to go to or near the
place of occurrence or near the road construction project nor will annoy or disturb the informant or the other witness of the case in any manner during trial of the case hence, the petitioner may be admitted to regular bail. Learned Addl. P.P. opposed the prayer for regular bail . Considering submissions of learned counsels and the facts as stated above, I am inclined to release the petitioner on bail. Hence, the court below is directed to release the petitioner on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned J.M., 1st Class, West Singhbhum at Chaibasa in connection with Tonto P.S. Case No. 39 of 2024 with the condition that the petitioner will neither go to or near the place of occurrence or over the construction project nor will annoy or disturb the informant or the other witness of the case in any manner during trial of the case and will co-operate with the trial of the case and will furnish mobile phone number and photocopy of the Aadhar Card in the court below with an undertaking that he will not change the mobile phone number during the trial of the case.
(ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.)
Smita/-