2026:JHHC:4252 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 9506 of 2025 ------ Manoj Turi, son of Amin Turi, resident of Village Budhudih, P.O. Budhudih, P.S. Ahilyapur, District Giridih, Jharkhand .... .... …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opp. Party CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY For the Petitioner : Mr. Zaid Ahmed, Advocate For the State : Mr. Bishambhar Shastri, A.P.P. For the Informant : Mr. Nagmani Tiwari, Advocate Mr. Govind Raj Karan, Advocate ------ Order No.06 / Dated : 13.02.2026 Bail petition filed on behalf of the petitioner- Manoj Turi, who is in custody since 25.05.2025 in connection with Ahilyapur P.S. Case No. 14 of 2025 for the offence registered under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 115(2), 126(2), 117(2), 109, 118(2), 324(4), 333, 303(2), 352, 351(2), 3(5) of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Giridih, is pressed into motion. As per the FIR, altogether ten named accused persons conjointly entered into the shop armed with deadly weapon and ransacked the shop and assaulted the informant and his father. It is also alleged that Rs.50,500/-was looted by the members of unlawful assembly. It is submitted by the learned counsel on behalf of petitioner that general and omnibus allegation has been levelled against the entire family members of the petitioner. It is further submitted that the genesis of offence was to get the shop vacated, and there was no intention to cause death as it is a case of single blow inflicted by Farsa by this petitioner. Though the petitioner has criminal antecedents, but he has been acquitted in one of the cases. Learned A.P.P. assisted by learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposed the bail petition. It is submitted that two persons sustained grievous injury in the assault. There is direct allegation against this petitioner that he inflicted Farsa blow on head of the father of the informant result in depressed fracture over his scalp. Petitioner has criminal antecedents of being involved in three cases. Considering the direct allegation against this petitioner and criminal antecedents, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner stands rejected. (Gautam Kumar Choudhary, J.) Anit Uploaded 16.02.2026