Neutral Citation 2026:JHHC:18411-DB CRIMINAL APPEAL (DB) NO. 487 OF 2026 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 487 of 2026 Sunil Ganjhu @ Mangra Ganjhu, S/o Late Mahesh Ganjhu, R/o Vill- Lukiya, P.O.- Hutap, P.S.- Chandwa, Dist.- Latehar. ... Appellant Versus Union of India through National Investigating Agency, New Delhi. … Respondent ---- PRESENT HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR RAI ---- For the Appellant : Mr. Birendra Kumar, Adv. For the NIA : Mr. Amit Kumar Das, Sr. Adv. ---- Dated : 23/06/2026 1. Heard Mr. Birendra Kumar, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. Amit Kumar Das, learned senior counsel appearing for the NIA. 2. This appeal is directed against the order dated 23-03-2026 passed in Misc. Criminal Application No. 396/2026 in connection with Special (NIA) Case No. 02/2020 arising out of RC No. 25/2020/NIA/DLI by Sri Abhimanyu Kumar, learned Additional Judicial Commissioner-XVI-cum-Special Judge, NIA, Ranchi, whereby and whereunder, the prayer for bail of the appellant has been rejected. 3. The prosecution case is that on 22.11.2019 at 8:00 P.M., a patrolling party of Chandwa Police Station in course of patrolling duty stopped at Lukuiya More at Chandwa. It has been alleged that the cadre of banned terrorist organization i.e. CPI (Maoist) who were waiting in advance, fired indiscriminately at the police patrolling party which led to the death of 4 police personnel. Neutral Citation 2026:JHHC:18411-DB CRIMINAL APPEAL (DB) NO. 487 OF 2026 2 Arms and ammunitions were also looted from the martyred police personnel and by raising slogans, the Maoists fled away. Later on, one of the Home Guard namely, Dinesh Ram who had escaped unhurt, rushed to the Chandwa Police Station and lodged a complaint. 4. Based on the aforesaid allegations, Chandwa P.S. Case No. 158 of 2019 was instituted against 18 named and some unknown accused persons. On completion of investigation, chargesheet was submitted against Baijnath Ganjhu, Sunil Ganjhu @ Mangra, Rajesh Kumar Ganjhu, Sanjay Ganjhu, Naresh Ganjhu and Faguna Ganjhu. The Central Government in exercise of its power conferred under Sub-section (5) of Section 6 read with Section 8 of the National Investigating Agency Act, 2008 vide M.H.A. New Delhi, CTCR Division Order No. 11011/42/2020/NIA dated 22.06.2020 directed the NIA to take up the investigation and accordingly, Chandwa P.S. Case No. 158 of 2019 was re-registered as R.C. No. 25 of 2020/NIA/DLI under Sections 147, 148, 149, 452, 302, 353 & 379 of Indian Penal Code, under Section 27 of the Arms Act, under Section 17 (i) & (ii) of Criminal Law Amendment Act and under Sections 10, 13, 17 and 18 of Unlawful Activity (Prevention) Act, 1967. The NIA had submitted the first supplementary charge-sheet against 34 persons for the offences punishable under Sections 120 (B), 121, 121 (A), 122, 147, 148, 149, 302, 307, 353, 395, 396 & 427 of Indian Penal Code, under Sections 10, 13, 16, 17, 18, 20, 21, 38, 39 & 40 of Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 and under Sections 25 (1-b) a, 26, 27 & 35 of the Arms Act. 5. It has been submitted by Mr. Birendra Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the appellant that the appellant did not take part in the indiscriminate firing made upon the police personnel which resulted in four deaths. It has been submitted that the appellant has been implicated primarily on the allegation Neutral Citation 2026:JHHC:18411-DB CRIMINAL APPEAL (DB) NO. 487 OF 2026 3 that he was an overground worker in the terrorist organization and had given logistical support to the members of the said organization. Learned counsel submits that the appellant is in custody since 06-01-2020 and there is no chance of the trial being concluded in the near future. Some of the co-accused persons in similar circumstances have been granted bail in Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 812 of 2025 and Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 1132 of 2025. Mr. Birendra Kumar, learned counsel for the appellant has brought to the notice of the Court that against the order dated 02-12-2025 passed in Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 1132 of 2025, the NIA had preferred an Appeal before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 6153/2026 which, however, was dismissed vide order dated 25-05-2026. 6. Mr. Amit Kumar Das, learned senior counsel for the NIA has submitted that the allegations against the appellant are much graver than the co-accused who have been granted bail as he had actively participated in the conspiracy so hatched and in executing the devious plan. Mr. Das has submitted that apart from protected witness “A” and “D” naming the appellant, the photo identification of the appellant was also carried out and during the said process, one of the witnesses Vikas Ganjhu had identified the photograph of the appellant as one of the persons who were present near the old crusher at Lukuiya village before the incident. Learned senior counsel has also submitted that the protected witness has also identified the appellant of standing beside Sunil Hotel near the place of incident. It has, therefore, been submitted that the case of the present appellant is easily distinguishable from the case of those accused who have been granted bail. 7. We have heard the learned counsel for the respective sides and have also perused the affidavits on record. 8. The appellant has been arrayed as (A-2) in the Neutral Citation 2026:JHHC:18411-DB CRIMINAL APPEAL (DB) NO. 487 OF 2026 4 supplementary charge sheet and his role in the entire episode leading to the death of all police personnel are depicted in the following manner: “2) Investigation has established that A-2 was an Over Ground Worker (OGW) of CPI (Maoist) and relative of A- 14.On 19.11.2019, A-2 had taken Ishwar Ganjhu and A-5 to meet A-14 at Beerjangha forest. On 20.11.2019, A-2, along with A-1 and Kunwar Ganjhu, had met A-14. On 22.11.2019, A-2, along with A-1, went to Bearjangha forest and attended the briefing of A-14 who told about their plan to ambush Police Patrolling Party at Lukaiya More and A-14 introduced them with 03 other Maoists and told that they will go to Lukuiya More, in advance, for recce and observation. A-14 also told them to arrange 2-3 Motor cycles for transporting Maoist cadres from Beerjangha forest to the place of incident and also for two-three local persons for supporting their Observing Team. Thereafter, as per plan, A-2, along with A-1, arranged one motorcycle and two local persons namely A-4 and A-6 to assist the Observing Team.A-2, transported the Attacking Team of CPI (Maoist) namely A-17 and A-23 from Beerjangha to Lukaiya More in his motorcycle. After the incident, A-2, along with A-1 & A- 6, assisted and helped the Attacking and Observing Team of CPI (Maoist) to reach Boda Pond. A-14 was present there, along with the other cadres of CPI (Maoist), and gave Rs. 5000 each to A-1, A-2 and A-6 as reward. Therefore, as per averments made in pre-para, it is established that A-2, was an Over Ground Worker/member of CPI (Macist), a proscribed Neutral Citation 2026:JHHC:18411-DB CRIMINAL APPEAL (DB) NO. 487 OF 2026 5 organization, and participated in the meeting in which conspiracy was hatched among co-accused, with common intention, and assisted co-accused to assemble with deadly weapons and to carry out terrorist attack on the police patrolling party which resulted in the killing of 04 police personnel and subsequently, snatching/ looting of Government issued arms and ammunition at Lukuiya More. Theeby, A-2 committed offences under sections 120B r/w 121, 121A, 147, 148, 149, 302, 307, 353, 395, 396, 427 of IPC, sections 10, 13, 16, 17, 18, 20, 38 & 39 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act 1967, as amended 2019, sections 15(1-B)a, 26, 27, 35 of Arms Act, 1959.” 9. The summarized version of the involvement of the appellant as depicted above focuses about the appellant being an overground worker of the terrorist organization providing logistical support including attending a briefing of (A-14) who had disclosed about the plans to ambush the police patrolling party at Lukuiya More. The appellant along with another accused had arranged one motorcycle and two local persons to assist the observation team and had transported the attacking team from Bir Jangha to Lukuiya More in his motorcycle and after the incident, he had met (A-14) who had given a reward of Rs. 5,000/- to him. 10. The supplementary charge sheet does not indicate that the appellant was one of the persons who was involved in the indiscriminate firing made upon the police personnel leading to the death of four police personnel. The appellant seems to have been involved as one of the conspirators who had provided ground support and other logistical support including transportation of the attacking team to the place where the incident had ultimately occurred. Though protected witness “A” Neutral Citation 2026:JHHC:18411-DB CRIMINAL APPEAL (DB) NO. 487 OF 2026 6 has identified the appellant, but his role has been depicted to be one of the persons who was standing near Sunil Hotel adjacent to the place of incident. It, therefore, cannot be deciphered that the appellant was one of the accused who was directly involved in making the indiscriminate firing upon the police personnel, but as we have observed above, was involved in giving logistical support to the members of the said organization. The appellant is in custody since 06-01-2020 and though the number of charge sheet witnesses has been pruned down to 89 as submitted by Mr. Das, learned senior counsel for the NIA, only 18 witnesses have been examined so far and, therefore, there is no chance of the trial being concluded in the near future. 11. In the case of Baijnath Ganjhu v. Union of India through National Investigation Agency, New Delhi in Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 1132 of 2025, it has been held as follows: “9. A perusal of the role and activity of the appellant as revealed above does not point to the fact that the appellant was directly involved and had participated in the indiscriminate firing made by the extremists upon the police party near Lukaiya More which resulted in the death of four police personnel. In fact it clearly reveals that the appellant was involved in giving logistic support to the terrorist organisation which is similar to that of the co-accused Rajesh Ganjhu who has already been granted bail as noted above. 12. The order dated 02-12-2025 passed in Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 1132 of 2025 has been affirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 6153/2026. Considering the fact that the case of the present appellant is almost similarly situated to that of the other co-accused who have been granted bail and taking into consideration the long Neutral Citation 2026:JHHC:18411-DB CRIMINAL APPEAL (DB) NO. 487 OF 2026 7 incarceration of the appellant and there being no chance of the trial being concluded in the near future, we are inclined to allow this appeal. Consequently, the order dated 23-03-2026 passed in Misc. Criminal Application No. 396/2026 in connection with Special (NIA) Case No. 02/2020 arising out of RC No. 25/2020/NIA/DLI by Sri Abhimanyu Kumar, learned Additional Judicial Commissioner-XVI-cum-Special Judge, NIA, Ranchi is hereby set aside and the appellant is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Judicial Commissioner-XVI-cum-Special Judge, NIA, Ranchi, subject to the condition that the appellant shall remain physically present before the learned trial court on each and every date till the conclusion of the trial, unless prevented by sufficient cause. 13. This appeal is allowed. 14. Pending I.A.(s), if any, stands closed. (RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY, J.) (ARUN KUMAR RAI, J.) Dated: 23rd June, 2026 Preet/- Uploaded on: 24/06/2026.