Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 1355 (JHR)

OM PRAKASH SAW @ PRAKASH SAW v. STATE OF JHARKHAND

B.A./255/2026 · 2026-03-23

Pradeep Kumar Srivastava

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

026:JHHC:8232 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 255 of 2026 --------- Om Prakash Saw @ Prakash Saw, aged about 40 years, sonof Late Khudan Saw, resident of Napokhurd, P.O. & P.S.-Barkagaon, District-Hazaribagh, Jharkhand … … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand …. Respondent --------- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA ---------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Manish Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mrs. Lily Sahay, A.P.P. ----------- 03/Dated: 23rd March, 2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Patratu (Bhurkunda O.P.) P.S. Case No. 183 of 2025 registered under sections 111(4), 308(5), 351(2), 352, 3(5) of B.N.S and sections 25(6), 26 and 35 of Arms Act. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence at all rather he has been falsely implicated in this case only on the basis of disclosure made by other co-accused, namely, Sarwan Kumar Ganjhu and Vishal Singh @ Babu, who have been granted bail by the Co-ordinated Bench of this Court in B.A. No.9595 of 2025 and B.A. No.10810 of 2025 and the case of the present petitioner stands on better footing. It is further submitted that no incriminating articles have been recovered from the possession of the petitioner. Although, the petitioner has some criminal antecedents but his involvement in the present case has not been brought on record through any cogent material. The petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 20.09.2025 without any rhymes and reasons. Petitioner undertakes to co-operate with the trial of the case and remain physically present on each and every 026:JHHC:8232 2 date till the conclusion of the trial and shall not indulge in tampering with the prosecution evidence or influence the witnesses or gain over them. Hence the petitioner may be enlarged on bail. 4. Learned Addl. P.P. has opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner but has fairly admitted that the case of present petitioner stands on similar footing as other co-accused persons, who have been granted bail as noted above. 5. Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of allegation against petitioner coupled with materials available on record, I am inclined to release the above named petitioner, on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner named above, is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned JMFC, Ramgarh in connection with Patratu (Bhurkunda O.P.) P.S. Case No. 183 of 2025 with condition that petitioner shall appear physically on each and every date during the trial of case till its conclusion unless his physical appearance is dispensed with for sufficient cause to the satisfaction of the learned trial court and with further condition that petitioner shall not indulge in tampering with the prosecution evidence or influence the witnesses or gain over them. (Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.) Pappu/- 23/03/2026