Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 11955 (JHR)

SANJAY KUMAR @ SANJAY KUMAR MANDAL @ SANJAY MANDAL v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

B.A./3452/2026 · 2026-05-07

Anil Kumar Choudhary

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

( 2026:JHHC:13710 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 3452 of 2026 ------ 1. Sanjay Kumar @ Sanjay Kumar Mandal @ Sanjay Mandal aged about 30 years, S/o Meghan Mandal @ Meghlal Mandal, R/o Village & P.O. –Dwarpahri, P.S. –Birni (Bharkatha O.P.), District –Giridih, Jharkhand. 2. Ramu Saw, aged about 35 years, S/o Khublal Sao @ Dipu Saw, R/o Village & P.O. –Dwarpahri, P.S. –Jamua, District –Giridih, Jharkhand. … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. A.K. Kashyap, Sr. Advocate : Mr. Suresh Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Shree Prakash Jha, Addl. P.P. ------ Order No.03 Dated- 07.05.2026 Heard the parties. The petitioners have moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with Jamua P.S. Case No.04 of 2026 registered for the offences punishable under sections 25(1-B)a/26/35 of the Arms Act. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioner no.1 was in illegal possession of two live cartridges and the co-accused and the petitioner no.2 were in illegal possession of firearms hidden in a jungle and a parked car from which two country made pistol, live bullets and loaded magazines were recovered. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioners are all false. It is next submitted that the petitioner no.1 has been in custody since 06.01.2026 and the petitioner no.2 has been in custody since 09.02.2026, as has been mentioned in paragraph no. 08 of the bail application. It is further submitted that the petitioners undertake to cooperate with the trial of the case and further undertake that they will not annoy or disturb the witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioners 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 petitioners on bail. Accordingly, the petitioners are 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 Judicial Magistrate -1st Class, Giridih, in connection with Jamua P.S. Case No.04 of 2026 with the condition that the petitioners will co-operate with the trial of the case and will furnish their mobile number and photocopy of the Aadhar Card with an undertaking that they will not change their mobile number during the trial of the case, with further condition that they will not annoy or disturb the witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) 07.05.2026 Sonu/