ARJUN MUNDA ALIAS ARJUN KUMAR MUNDA ALIAS DON v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND
B.A./4152/2026 · 2026-05-14
Anil Kumar Choudhary
Transfer Petitionbody2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 11905 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 11905 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
(2026:JHHC:14958) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B. A. No. 4152 of 2026
Arjun Munda @ Arjun Kumar Munda, aged about 22 years, son of Sone Munda @ Sauna Munda @ Savan Munda, r/o Fuljhar, PO & PS – Keredari, District- Hazaribagh. … … …Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand. … … …Opp. Party ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Pranav Prakash Mishra, Advocate For the State
: Ms. Bandana Sinha, Addl. P.P. ------ HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ Order No:- 02, Dated:- 14th May, 2026
Heard the parties. The petitioner has moved before this Court for grant of bail in connection with Pithoria P.S. Case No. 28 of 2024 corresponding to S.T. Case No. 201 of 2026, registered for the offences punishable under sections 147, 148, 149, 385 and 387 of the Indian Penal Code along with Section 27 of the Arms Act. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner is claiming himself to be a member of TPC and called the Munshi of the informant and demanded extortion, and threatened that unless the extortion amount is paid they will stop the work. Further, they made five to six round firing. It is next submitted that the petitioner is not named in the FIR and without conducting any T.I. Parade as mentioned in Para No. 14 of this bail application; charge-sheet has been submitted against the petitioner. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false and the petitioner has been in custody since 25.11.2025, as has been mentioned in paragraph no. 01 of the bail application. It is next 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 abovenamed 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) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Judicial Commissioner – XII, Ranchi, in connection with Pithoria P.S. Case No. 28 of 2024 corresponding to S.T. Case No. 201 of 2026, with the condition that the petitioner will cooperate with the trial of the case and will furnish his mobile number and a copy of his Aadhar Card in the court below with the 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.) Dated – 14.05.2026 Aditi