2026:JHHC:4074 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.12124 of 2025 ----- 1. Dharmendra Ray @ Rohit Rai @ Dharmendra Rai, aged about 31 years, S/o. Sri Logen Ray @ Laget Ray, R/o. Kenduatand, P.O.- Nagarkiyari, P.S.- Govindpur, Dist.- Dhanbad, Jharkhand. 2. Vikram Kumar, aged about 29 years, S/o. Krishna Kinkar Pandit @ Krishan Kinker Pandit, R/o. Bhuli D Block, Sector 10 B, Quarter No. 11, P.O.- Bhuli Nagar, P.S.- Bankmore (Bhuli O.P.), Dist.- Dhanbad, Jharkhand. .......... Petitioners. -Versus- The State of Jharkhand .......... Opp. Party. ----- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR ----- For the Petitioners : Ms. Diksha Rani, Advocate Mrs. Juhi Kumari, Advocate For the State : Mrs. Mohua Palit, A.P.P. ----- Order No.02 Date: 13.02.2026 1. The petitioners are an accused in the case registered under Section 310 (2) of the B.N.S., 2023 and cognizance has been taken under Sections 111(3), 111(4), 111(6) & 111(7) of the B.N.S., 2023 and Sections 25(1-B)(a), 25(6), 25(7), 26 & 35 of the Arms Act. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in the present case and have not committed any offence as alleged. Initially, the F.I.R. was lodged against unknown miscreants. During the investigation of the case, both the petitioners were implicated in this case on the alleged confessional statement of co-accused Kishan Pandit. The petitioners have not been put to Test Identification Parade so as to ensure their involvement in the alleged offence. The petitioners are in judicial custody in connection with this case since 27.08.2025. Hence, they may be enlarged on regular bail. 2026:JHHC:4074 2 3. Learned APP while opposing the petitioners’ prayer for regular bail submits that so far as petitioner no.2 Vikram Kumar is concerned, there is alleged recovery of some of the looted articles from his possession on the basis of alleged confession. She, however, fairly submits that so far as the petitioner no.1 Dharmendra Ray @ Rohit Rai @ Dharmendra Rai is concerned, there has been no such recovery of looted article from his possession. 4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the materials available on record, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner no.2 Vikram Kumar on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for regular bail of petitioner no.2 Vikram Kumar is rejected. 5. So far as, the petitioner no. 1 Dharmendra Ray @ Rohit Rai @ Dharmendra Rai is concerned, I am inclined to enlarge him on regular bail. 6. Accordingly, petitioner no.1 Dharmendra Ray @ Rohit Rai @ Dharmendra Rai 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 A.C.J.M., Bermo at Tenughat in connection with Nawadih P.S. Case No. 57 of 2025 with a condition that the petitioner shall remain physically present before the court below as and when required failing which the concerned trial court is at liberty to cancel his bail bond. (Rajesh Shankar, J.) 13th February, 2026 Rahul/ Uploaded on 16.02.2026