2026:JHHC:4522 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.10110 of 2025 ----- Gulam Goush, son of Amin Khan, resident of Village Patkoi, P.O. Murupiri, P.S. Burmu, District Ranchi, Jharkhand. … … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand. … … Opposite Party WITH B.A. No.10267 of 2025 ----- Arvind Yadav, son of Devnath Yadav @ Jhubal Yadav @ Dewnath Yadav, resident of Village Saram, P.O. Murupiri, P.S. Burmu, District Ranchi, Jharkhand. … … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand. … … Opposite Party ----- CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ----- For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Avishek Prasad, Advocate Mr. Ashok Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Sardhu Mahto, A.P.P. Mr. Sunil Kr. Dubey, A.P.P. ----- 03/ 16.02.2026 These Bail Applications under Sections 483 and 484 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, have been filed to release the petitioners on regular bail in connection with S.T. Case No.465 of 2025, arising out of Chanho P.S. Case No.40 of 2025, for offences under Sections 310(3) and 311 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023. Cognizance has been taken under Sections 310(3), 311, 317 (3) of the BNS, 2023 and Sections 25 (1-A)/25(1-B)a/26/27/35 of the Arms Act. The case is presently pending before the Court of learned Additional Judicial Commissioner-XVII, Ranchi. 2. Heard learned counsel representing the petitioners and learned A.P.P. representing the State. Perused the material available on record and also gone through the impugned order. 3. In March, 2025, a dacoity took place at the Anand Marg Ashram, Ranchi. These petitioners were alleged to have committed dacoity by entering into the hermitage where several hermits were living, and upon raising objection by one of the hermits, the 2026:JHHC:4522 2 petitioners committed murder of two persons, one of whom was husband of this informant. 4. Learned counsel representing the petitioner submits that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case and they have been made accused only on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused. 5. Learned A.P.P. representing the State oppose the prayer for bail. 6. From perusal of the F.I.R. and the materials available on record, I find that the petitioner – Arvind Yadav (in B.A. No.10267 of 2025), is a named accused. His name has been clearly surfaced from the statement of one witness namely Jugeshwar Yadav. 6.1. So far as the petitioner – Gulam Goush (in B.A. No.10110 of 2025) is concerned, though he was not named in the F.I.R., but his identification is absolutely necessary during trial, as the entire offence cannot be ruled out, where two hermits were murdered in the hermitage and their belongings were snatched and looted. 7. Considering the aforesaid allegations and the statement of the witness, I am not inclined to release the petitioners on bail. 8. Accordingly, these Bail Applications are dismissed. 9. The Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial. (ANANDA SEN, J.) 16th February, 2026 Prashant. Cp-3 Uploaded on 19.02.2026