Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 11038 (JHR)

ARJUN MUNDA v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

B.A./1272/2026 · 2026-04-27

Anil Kumar Choudhary

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

( 2026:JHHC:12306 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 1272 of 2026 ------ Arjun Munda, aged about 28 years, son of Anand Singh Munda @ Anant Singh, residence of Arkiya, P.O. & P.S. – Bundu, District –Ranchi, Jharkhand. … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Saket Kumar, Addl. P.P. ------ Order No.04 Dated- 27.04.2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with Maranghada P.S. Case No.09 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under sections 392, 395, 412 of the Indian Penal Code. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner committed dacoity and looted money from the informant. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false and the petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. It is next submitted that without putting the petitioner on Test Identification Parade as mentioned in para -4 of the supplementary affidavit dated 20.04.2026, charge sheet has been submitted against the petitioner. It is then submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent as has been mentioned in para –09 of the bail application. It is next submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 24.09.2025, as has been mentioned in paragraph no. 01 of the bail application. It is further submitted that the petitioner undertakes to cooperate with the trial of the case and further undertakes that he will not annoy or disturb the informant or the witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be admitted to bail. The learned Addl. P.P. opposes the prayer for bail. Considering the submissions of the counsels and the fact as discussed above, I am inclined to enlarge the above-named petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to be released 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 A.C.J.M., Khunti, in connection with Maranghada P.S. Case No.09 of 2024 with the condition that the petitioner will co-operate with the trial of the case and will furnish his mobile number and photocopy of the Aadhar Card with an undertaking that he will not change his mobile number during the trial of the case, with further condition that he will not annoy or disturb the informant or the witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) 27.04.2026 Sonu/